Item 1.    Business

Protective Life Corporation (the “Company”), is a holding company headquartered in Birmingham, Alabama, with subsidiaries that provide financial services primarily in the United States through the production, distribution, and administration of insurance and investment products. Founded in 1907, Protective Life Insurance Company (“PLICO”) is the Company’s largest operating subsidiary. Unless the context otherwise requires, the “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our” refers to the consolidated group of Protective Life Corporation and its subsidiaries.

On February 1, 2015, The Dai-ichi Life Insurance Company, Limited, a kabushiki kaisha organized under the laws of Japan (now known as Dai-ichi Life Holdings, Inc., “Dai-ichi Life”), acquired 100% of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock through the merger of DL Investment (Delaware), Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Dai-ichi Life, with and into the Company, with the Company continuing as the surviving entity (the “Merger”). As a result of the Merger, the Company is a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of Dai-ichi Life.

The Company operates several operating segments, each having a strategic focus. An operating segment is distinguished by products, channels of distribution, and/or other strategic distinctions. The Company’s operating segments are Life Marketing, Acquisitions, Annuities, Stable Value Products, and Asset Protection. The Company has an additional reporting segment referred to as Corporate and Other which consists of net investment income on assets supporting our equity capital, unallocated corporate overhead, and expenses not attributable to the segments above (including interest on certain corporate debt). This segment also includes earnings from several non-strategic or runoff lines of business, financing and investment-related transactions, and the operations of several small subsidiaries. The Company periodically evaluates its operating segments and makes adjustments to our segment reporting as needed.

Additional information concerning the Company and its operating segments may be found in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations , and Note 22, Operating Segments to the consolidated financial statements included in this report.

In the following paragraphs, the Company reports sales and other statistical information. These statistics are used to measure the relative progress of its marketing and acquisition efforts, but may not have an immediate impact on reported segment or consolidated adjusted operating income. Sales data for traditional life insurance is based on annualized premiums, while universal life sales are based on annualized planned premiums, or “target” premiums if lesser, plus 6% of amounts received in excess of target premiums and 10% of single premiums. “Target” premiums for universal life are those premiums upon which full first year commissions are paid. Sales of annuities are measured based on the amount of purchase payments received less surrenders occurring within twelve months of the purchase payments. Stable value contract sales are measured at the time the purchase payments are received. Sales within the Asset Protection segment are based on the amount of single premiums and fees received.

These statistics are derived from various sales tracking and administrative systems and are not derived from the Company’s financial reporting systems or financial statements. These statistics attempt to measure only some of the many factors that may affect future profitability, and therefore, are not intended to be predictive of future profitability.

Life Marketing

The Life Marketing segment markets fixed universal life (“UL”), indexed universal life (“IUL”), variable universal life (“VUL”), bank-owned life insurance (“BOLI”), and level premium term insurance (“traditional”) products on a national basis, primarily through networks of independent insurance agents and brokers, broker-dealers, financial institutions, independent distribution organizations, and affinity groups.

The following table presents the Life Marketing segment’s sales as defined above:

Acquisitions

The Acquisitions segment focuses on acquiring, converting, and servicing policies and contracts from other companies. The segment’s primary focus is on life insurance policies and annuity products that were sold to individuals. The level of the segment’s acquisition activity is predicated upon many factors, including available capital, operating capacity, potential return on capital, and market dynamics. The Company expects acquisition opportunities to continue to be available. However, the Company believes it may face increased competition and evolving capital requirements that may affect the environment and the form of future acquisitions.

Most acquisitions completed by the Acquisitions segment have not included the acquisition of an active sales force, thus policies acquired through the segment are typically blocks of business where no new policies are being marketed. Therefore, earnings and account values are expected to decline as the result of lapses, deaths, and other terminations of coverage, unless new acquisitions are made. The segment’s revenues and earnings may fluctuate from year to year depending upon the level of acquisition activity. In transactions where some marketing activity was included, the Company may cease future marketing efforts, redirect those efforts to another segment of the Company, or elect to continue marketing new policies as a component of other segments.

The Company believes that its focused and disciplined approach to the acquisition process and its experience in the assimilation, conservation, and servicing of acquired policies provides a significant competitive advantage.

On May 1, 2018, The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company (“Lincoln Life”) completed the acquisition (the “Closing”) of Liberty Mutual Group Inc.’s (“Liberty Mutual”) Group Benefits Business and Individual Life and Annuity Business (the “Life Business”) through the acquisition of all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston (“Liberty”). In connection with the Closing and  pursuant to the Master Transaction Agreement, dated January 18, 2018, PLICO and Protective Life and Annuity Insurance Company (“PLAIC”), a wholly owned subsidiary of PLICO, entered into reinsurance agreements (the “Reinsurance Agreements”) and related ancillary documents (including administrative services agreements and transition services agreements) providing for the reinsurance and administration of the Life Business.

Pursuant to the Reinsurance Agreements, Liberty ceded to PLICO and PLAIC the insurance policies related to the Life Business on a 100% coinsurance basis. The aggregate ceding commission for the reinsurance of the Life Business was $422.4 million, which is the purchase price. Other than cash received as part of the acquired Liberty investment portfolio as reflected in “amounts received from reinsurance transaction” in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows and as reflected in the table below, this was a non-cash transaction.

All policies issued in states other than New York were ceded to PLICO under a reinsurance agreement between Liberty and PLICO, and all policies issued in New York were ceded to PLAIC under a reinsurance agreement between Liberty and PLAIC.  The aggregate statutory reserves of Liberty ceded to PLICO and PLAIC as of the closing of the Transaction were approximately $13.2 billion, which amount was based on initial estimates and is subject to adjustment following the Closing. Pursuant to the terms of the Reinsurance Agreements, each of PLICO and PLAIC are required to maintain assets in trust for the benefit of Liberty to secure their respective obligations to Liberty under the Reinsurance Agreements. The trust accounts were initially funded by each of PLICO and PLAIC principally with the investment assets that were received from Liberty. Additionally, PLICO and PLAIC have each agreed to provide, on behalf of Liberty, administration and policyholder servicing of the Life Business reinsured by it pursuant to administrative services agreements between Liberty and each of PLICO and PLAIC.

On January 23, 2019, PLICO entered into a Master Transaction Agreement (the “GWL&A Master Transaction Agreement”) with Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company (“GWL&A”), Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company of New York (“GWL&A of NY”), The Canada Life Assurance Company (“CLAC”) and The Great-West Life Assurance Company (“GWL” and, together with GWL&A, GWL&A of NY and CLAC, the “Sellers”), pursuant to which PLICO will acquire via reinsurance (the “Transaction”) substantially all of the Sellers’ individual life insurance and annuity business (the “Individual Life Business”). Pursuant to the GWL&A Master Transaction Agreement, PLICO and PLAIC will enter into reinsurance agreements (the “Reinsurance Agreements”) and related ancillary documents at the closing of the Transaction. On the terms and subject to the conditions of the Reinsurance Agreements, the Sellers will cede to PLICO and PLAIC, effective as of the closing of the Transaction, substantially all of the insurance policies relating to the Individual Life Business. To support its obligations under the Reinsurance Agreements, PLICO will establish trust accounts for the benefit of GWL&A, CLAC and GWL, and PLAIC will establish a trust account for the benefit of GWL&A of NY. The Sellers will retain a block of participating policies, which will be administered by the Company.

The Transaction is subject to the satisfaction or waiver of customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals and the execution of the Reinsurance Agreements and related ancillary documents. The GWL&A Master Transaction Agreement and other transaction documents contain certain customary representations and warranties made by each of the parties, and certain customary covenants regarding the Sellers and the Individual Life Business, and provide for indemnification, among other things, for breaches of those representations, warranties and covenants.    

Annuities

The Annuities segment markets fixed and variable annuity (“VA”) products. These products are primarily sold through broker-dealers, financial institutions, and independent agents and brokers.

The Company’s variable annuities offer the policyholder the opportunity to invest in various investment accounts and offer optional features that guarantee the death and withdrawal benefits of the underlying annuity.

The Company’s fixed annuities include indexed annuities, single premium deferred annuities, and single premium immediate annuities. The Company’s fixed annuities also include modified guaranteed annuities which guarantee an interest rate for a fixed period. Contract values for these annuities are “market-value adjusted” upon surrender prior to maturity. In certain interest rate environments, these products afford the Company with a measure of protection from the effects of changes in interest rates.

The demand for annuity products is related to the general level of interest rates, performance of the equity markets, and perceived risk of insurance companies. The following table presents fixed annuity and VA sales:

Stable Value Products

The Stable Value Products segment sells fixed and floating rate funding agreements directly to the trustees of municipal bond proceeds, money market funds, bank trust departments, and other institutional investors. The segment also issues funding agreements to the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and markets guaranteed investment contracts (“GICs”) to 401(k) and other qualified retirement savings plans. GICs are contracts which specify a return on funds for a specified period and often provide flexibility for withdrawals at book value in keeping with the benefits provided by the plan. The demand for GICs is related to the relative attractiveness of the “fixed rate” investment option in a 401(k) plan compared to the equity-based investment options which may be available to plan participants. The Company also has an unregistered funding agreement-backed notes program which provides for offers of notes to both domestic and international institutional investors. Most GICs and funding agreements the Company has written have maturities of one to twelve years.

The following table presents Stable Value Products sales:

Asset Protection

The Asset Protection segment markets extended service contracts, credit life and disability insurance, and other specialized ancillary products to protect consumers’ investments in automobiles, recreational vehicles, watercraft, and powersports. In addition, the segment markets a guaranteed asset protection (“GAP”) product. GAP products are designed to cover the difference between the scheduled loan pay-off amount and an asset’s actual cash value in the case of a total loss. Each type of specialized ancillary product protects against damage or other loss to a particular aspect of the underlying asset. The segment’s products are primarily marketed through a national network of approximately 8,500 automobile, marine, RV, and powersports dealers. A network of direct employee sales representatives and general agents distribute these products to the dealer market.

The following table presents the insurance and related product sales measured by the amount of single premiums and fees received:

In 2018, all of the segment’s sales were through the automobile, RV, marine, and powersports dealer distribution channel and approximately 83.7% of the segment’s sales were extended service contracts. A portion of the sales and resulting premiums are reinsured with producer-affiliated reinsurers.

Corporate and Other

The Corporate and Other segment primarily consists of net investment income on assets supporting our equity capital, unallocated corporate overhead, and expenses not attributable to the segments above (including interest on corporate debt). This segment includes earnings from several non-strategic or runoff lines of business, financing and investment related transactions, and the operations of several small subsidiaries. The results of this segment may fluctuate from year to year.

Investments

As of December 31, 2018 (Successor Company), the Company’s investment portfolio was approximately $66.1 billion. The types of assets in which the Company may invest are influenced by various state insurance laws which prescribe qualified investment assets. Within the parameters of these laws, the Company invests in assets giving consideration to such factors as liquidity and capital needs, investment quality, investment return, matching of assets and liabilities, and the overall composition of the investment portfolio by asset type and credit exposure. On February 1, 2015, immediately before the Merger, the fair value of the Company’s investment portfolio was significantly above the carrying value primarily due to low market interest rates. As a result of purchase accounting applied as of February 1, 2015, the carrying value of the Company’s investment portfolio was adjusted to fair value which resulted in a drop in the overall yield of the Company’s investment portfolio for the successor period. For further information regarding the Company’s investments, the maturity of and the concentration of risk among the Company’s invested assets, derivative financial instruments, and liquidity, see Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Note 5, Investment Operations , and Note 7, Derivative Financial Instruments to the consolidated financial statements included in this report, and Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations .

The following table presents the investment results from continuing operations of the Company:

Mortgage Loans

The Company invests a portion of its investment portfolio in commercial mortgage loans. As of December 31, 2018 (Successor Company), the Company’s mortgage loan holdings were approximately $7.7 billion. The Company has specialized in making loans on credit-oriented commercial properties, credit-anchored strip shopping centers, senior living facilities, and apartments. The Company’s underwriting procedures relative to its commercial loan portfolio are based, in the Company’s view, on a conservative and disciplined approach. The Company concentrates on a small number of commercial real estate asset types associated with the necessities of life (retail, multi-family, senior living, professional office buildings, and warehouses). The Company believes these asset types tend to weather economic downturns better than other commercial asset classes in which it has chosen not to participate. The Company believes this disciplined approach has helped to maintain a relatively low delinquency and foreclosure rate throughout its history. The majority of the Company’s mortgage loan portfolio was underwritten and funded by the Company. From time to time, the Company may acquire loans in conjunction with an acquisition. For more information

regarding the Company’s investment in mortgage loans, refer to Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and Note 9, Mortgage Loans to the consolidated financial statements included herein.

Ratings

Various Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“rating organizations”) review the financial performance and condition of insurers, including our insurance subsidiaries, and publish their financial strength ratings as indicators of an insurer’s ability to meet policyholder and contract holder obligations. These ratings are important to maintaining public confidence in an insurer’s products, its ability to market its products and its competitive position. The following table summarizes the current financial strength ratings of our significant member companies from the major independent rating organizations:

The Company’s ratings are subject to review and change by the rating organizations at any time and without notice. A downgrade or other negative action by a ratings organization with respect to the financial strength ratings of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries could adversely affect sales, relationships with distributors, the level of policy surrenders and withdrawals, the Company’s acquisitions strategy or competitive position in the marketplace, and the cost or availability of reinsurance. The rating agencies may take various actions, positive or negative, with respect to the financial strength ratings of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries, including as a result of the Company’s status as a subsidiary of Dai-ichi Life.

Rating organizations also publish credit ratings for the issuers of debt securities, including the Company. Credit ratings are indicators of a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner. These ratings are important in the debt issuer’s overall ability to access credit markets and other types of liquidity. Ratings are not recommendations to buy the Company’s securities or products. A downgrade or other negative action by a ratings organization with respect to our credit rating could limit the Company’s access to capital markets, increase the cost of issuing debt, and a downgrade of sufficient magnitude, combined with other negative factors, could require the Company to post collateral. The rating organizations may take various actions, positive or negative, with respect to the Company’s debt ratings.

The ratio of voluntary terminations of individual life insurance to mean individual life insurance in-force, which is determined by dividing the amount of insurance terminated due to lapses during the year by the mean of the insurance in-force at the beginning and end of the year, adjusted for the timing of major acquisitions is as follows:

Underwriting

The underwriting policies of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are established by management. With respect to individual insurance, the subsidiaries use information from the application, and in some cases, third party medical information providers, inspection reports, credit reports, motor vehicle records, previous underwriting records, attending physician statements and/or the results of a medical exam, to determine whether a policy should be issued as applied for, other than applied for, or rejected. Substandard risks may be referred to reinsurers for evaluation. The Company does utilize a “simplified issue” approach for certain policies. In the case of “simplified issue” policies, coverage is rejected if the responses to certain health questions contained in the application, or the applicant’s inability to make an unqualified health certification, indicate adverse health of the applicant.

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries generally require blood samples to be drawn with individual insurance applications above certain face amounts based on the applicant’s age. Blood samples are tested for a wide range of chemical values and are screened for antibodies to certain viruses. Applications also contain questions permitted by law regarding certain viruses which must be answered by the proposed insureds.

The Company utilizes an advanced underwriting system, TeleLife®, for certain product lines in its life business. TeleLife® streamlines the application process through a telephonic interview of the applicant, schedules medical exams, accelerates the underwriting process and the ultimate issuance of a policy mostly through electronic means. The Company also introduced a streamlined underwriting approach that utilizes the TeleLife® process and noninvasive risk selection tools to approve some applications without requiring a paramedical exam or lab testing.

The Company’s maximum retention limit on directly issued business is $5,000,000 for any one life on certain of its traditional life and universal life products.

Reinsurance Ceded

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries cede life insurance to other insurance companies. The ceding insurance company remains liable with respect to ceded insurance should any reinsurer fail to meet the obligations assumed by it.

For approximately 10 years prior to mid-2005, the Company entered into reinsurance contracts in which the Company ceded approximately 90% of its newly-written traditional life insurance business on a first dollar quota share basis under coinsurance contracts. In mid-2005, the Company substantially discontinued coinsuring its newly written traditional life insurance and moved to yearly renewable term (“YRT”) reinsurance. The amount of insurance retained by the Company on any one life on traditional life insurance was $500,000 in years prior to mid-2005. In 2005, this retention amount was increased to $1,000,000 for certain policies, and during 2008, was increased to $2,000,000 for certain policies. During 2016, the retention amount was increased to $5,000,000.

For approximately 15 years prior to 2012, the Company reinsured 90% of the mortality risk on the majority of its newly written universal life insurance on a YRT basis. During 2012, the Company moved to reinsure only amounts in excess of its $2,000,000 retention, which was increased to $5,000,000 during 2016, for the majority of its newly written universal life and level premium term insurance.

Policy Liabilities and Accruals

The applicable insurance laws under which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries operate require that each insurance company report policy liabilities to meet future obligations on the outstanding policies. These liabilities are calculated in accordance with applicable law. These liabilities along with additional premiums to be received and the compounded interest earned on those premiums are considered to be sufficient to meet the various policy and contract obligations as they mature. These laws specify that the liabilities shall not be less than liabilities calculated using certain named mortality tables and interest rates.

The policy liabilities and accruals carried in the Company’s financial reports presented on the basis of accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) differ from those specified by the laws of the various states and carried in the insurance subsidiaries’ statutory financial statements (presented on the basis of statutory accounting principles mandated by state insurance regulations). For policy liabilities for traditional life, immediate annuity, and health contracts, these differences arise from the use of mortality and morbidity tables and interest rate assumptions which are deemed to be more appropriate for financial reporting purposes than those required for statutory accounting purposes. The GAAP policy liabilities also include lapse assumptions in the calculation and use the net level premium method on all business which generally differs from policy liabilities calculated for statutory financial statements. Policy liabilities for universal life policies, deferred annuity contracts, GICs, and funding agreements are generally carried in the Company’s financial reports at the account value of the policy or contract plus accrued interest. Additional liabilities are held as appropriate for excess benefits above the account value.

Federal Taxes

In general, existing law generally exempts policyholders from current taxation on an increase in the value of their life insurance and annuity products during these products’ accumulation phase. This favorable tax treatment gives certain of the Company’s products a competitive advantage over investment products. If tax laws are revised such that there is an elimination or scale-back of this favorable tax treatment, or competing investment products are granted similar tax treatment, then the relative attractiveness of the Company’s products may be reduced or eliminated.

The Company is subject to corporate income, excise, franchise, and premium taxes. In December 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Reform Act”) was enacted. It significantly changed U.S. tax law. For example, it lowered the corporate income tax rate, beginning in 2018. This resulted in a decrease in the Company’s effective tax rate. The Tax Reform Act increases the Company’s taxable income, as a result of changes regarding policy acquisition costs and policyholder benefit reserves. While overall the Tax Reform Act will cause the Company to report higher amounts of taxable income, the Company expects to pay less future income taxes due to the lower tax rate.

In addition, life insurance products are often used to fund estate tax obligations. Recent and possibly future changes to estate tax law may affect the demand for life insurance products.

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries are generally taxed in the same manner as are other companies in the industry. Certain tax law restrictions prevent the immediate inclusion of recently-acquired life insurance companies in the Company’s consolidated income tax return. Additionally, these restrictions limit the amount of life insurance income that can be offset by non-life-insurance losses. Overall, these restrictions may cause the Company’s effective tax rate to increase.

The Company’s decreased reliance on reinsurance for newly written traditional life products resulted in a reduction in the taxes which the Company currently pays, offset by an increase in its deferred taxes. The Company allocates the benefits of reduced current taxes to the Life Marketing and Acquisition segments. The profitability and competitive position of certain of the Company products are dependent on the continuation of certain tax benefits which are provided by current tax law and the Company’s ability to generate future taxable income.

Competition

Life and health insurance is a mature and highly competitive industry. In recent years, the industry’s life insurance sales have been relatively flat, though the aging population has increased the demand for retirement savings products. The Company encounters significant competition in all lines of business, including in the Acquisitions segment.

The Company encounters competition for sales of life insurance and retirement products from other insurance companies, many of which have greater financial resources than the Company and which may have a greater market share, offer a broader range of products, services or features, assume a greater level of risk, have lower operating or financing costs, or have lower profitability expectations. The Company also faces competition from other providers of financial services. Competition could result in, among other things, lower sales or higher lapses of existing products.

The Company’s ability to compete is dependent upon, among other things, its ability to attract and retain distributors to market its insurance and investment products, its ability to develop competitive and profitable products, its ability to maintain low unit costs, and its maintenance of adequate ratings from rating organizations.

As technology evolves, a comparison of a particular product of any company for a particular customer with competing products for that customer is more readily available, which could lead to increased competition as well as agent or customer behavior, including persistency, which differs from past behavior.

The Company encounters competition in its Acquisitions segment from other insurance companies as well as from other types of acquirers, including private equity investors. Many of these competitors may have greater financial resources than the Company and may be willing to assume a greater level of risk, have lower operating or financing costs, or have lower profitability expectations.

Risk Management

Risk management is a critical part of the Company’s business, and the Company has adopted risk management processes in multiple aspects of its operations, including product development and management, business acquisitions, underwriting, investment management, asset-liability management, hedging, and technology. The Company’s Enterprise Risk Management office, under the direction of the Chief Risk Officer, along with other departments, management groups and committees, have responsibilities for managing different risks throughout the Company. Risk management includes the assessment of risk, a decision process which includes determining which risks are acceptable and the monitoring and management of identified risks on an ongoing basis. The primary objectives of these risk management processes are to determine the acceptable level of variations the Company experiences from its expected results and to implement strategies designed to limit such variations to these levels.

Regulation

State Regulation

The Company is subject to government regulation in each of the states in which it conducts business. In many instances, the regulatory models emanate from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”). Such regulation is vested in state agencies having broad administrative and in some instances discretionary power dealing with many aspects of the Company’s business, which may include, among other things, premium and cost of insurance rates and increases thereto, interest crediting policy, underwriting practices, reserve requirements, marketing practices, advertising, privacy, data security, cybersecurity, policy forms, reinsurance reserve requirements, insurer use of captive reinsurance companies, acquisitions, mergers, capital adequacy, claims practices and the remittance of unclaimed property. In addition, some state insurance departments may enact rules or regulations with extra-territorial application, effectively extending their jurisdiction to areas such as permitted insurance company investments that are normally the province of an insurance company’s domiciliary state regulator.

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries are required to file periodic reports with the regulatory agencies in each of the jurisdictions in which they do business, and their business and accounts are subject to examination by such agencies at any time. Under the rules of the NAIC, insurance companies are examined periodically (generally every three to five years) by one or more of the regulatory agencies on behalf of the states in which they do business. At any given time, a number of financial and/or market conduct examinations of the Company’s subsidiaries may be ongoing. From time to time, regulators raise issues during examinations or audits for the Company’s subsidiaries that could, if determined adversely, have a material adverse impact on the Company. To date, no such insurance department examinations have produced any significant adverse findings regarding any of the Company’s insurance company subsidiaries.

Under the insurance guaranty fund laws in most states, insurance companies doing business in the state can be assessed up to prescribed limits for policyholder losses incurred by insolvent companies. From time to time, companies may be asked to contribute amounts beyond prescribed limits. It is possible that the Company could be assessed with respect to product lines not offered by the Company. In addition, legislation may be introduced in various states with respect to guaranty fund assessment laws related to insurance products, including long-term care insurance and other specialty products, that increases the cost of future assessments or alters future premium tax offsets received in connection with guaranty fund assessments. The Company cannot predict the amount, nature or timing of any future assessments or legislation, any of which could have a material and adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

In addition, many states, including the states in which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled, have enacted legislation or adopted regulations regarding insurance holding company systems. These laws require registration of and periodic reporting by insurance companies domiciled within the jurisdiction which control or are controlled by other corporations or persons so as to constitute an insurance holding company system. These laws also affect the acquisition of control of insurance companies as well as transactions between insurance companies and companies controlling them. Most states, including Tennessee, where PLICO is domiciled, require administrative approval of the acquisition of control of an insurance company domiciled in the state or the acquisition of control of an insurance holding company whose insurance subsidiary is incorporated in the state. In Tennessee, the acquisition of 10% of the voting securities of an entity is deemed to be the acquisition of control for the purpose of the insurance holding company statute and requires not only the filing of detailed information concerning the acquiring parties and the plan of acquisition, but also administrative approval prior to the acquisition. Holding company legislation has been adopted in certain states where the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled, which subjects the subsidiaries to increased reporting requirements. Holding company legislation has also been proposed in additional states, which, if adopted, will subject any domiciled subsidiaries to additional reporting and supervision requirements.

The states in which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled also impose certain restrictions on the subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends to the Company. These restrictions are based in part on the prior year’s statutory income and surplus. In general, dividends up to specified levels are considered ordinary and may be paid without prior approval. Dividends in larger amounts are considered extraordinary and are subject to affirmative prior approval by the insurance commissioner of the state of domicile. The maximum amount that would qualify as ordinary dividends to the Company by its insurance subsidiaries in 2019 is approximately, in the aggregate, $434.0 million. No assurance can be given that more stringent restrictions will not be adopted from time to time by states in which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled; such restrictions could have the effect, under certain circumstances, of significantly reducing dividends or other amounts payable to the Company by such subsidiaries without prior approval by state regulatory authorities.

State insurance regulators and the NAIC regularly re-examine existing laws and regulations applicable to insurance companies and their products. Changes in these laws and regulations, or in interpretations thereof, are often made for the benefit of the consumer and may lead to additional expense for the insurer. Furthermore, some NAIC pronouncements, particularly as they affect accounting issues, take effect automatically in various states without affirmative action by those states.

The NAIC is considering revisions to the Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation which, if adopted by regulators, could impose a stricter standard of care upon insurers who sell annuities. Likewise, several states are considering or have adopted legislation or regulatory measures that would implement new requirements and standards applicable to the sale of annuities and, in some cases, life insurance products. The NAIC and several states, including Connecticut, Nevada, New Jersey, and New York have passed laws or proposed regulations requiring insurers, investment advisers, broker-dealers, and/or agents to disclose conflicts of interest to clients or to meet standards that their advice be in the customer’s best interest. These standards vary widely in scope, applicability, and timing of implementation. The adoption and enactment of these or any revised standards as law or regulation could have a material adverse effect upon the manner in which the Company’s products are sold and impact the overall market for such products.

Federal Regulation

At the federal level, the executive branch or federal agencies may issue orders or take other action with respect to financial services and life insurance matters, and bills are routinely introduced in both chambers of the United States Congress which could affect the Company’s business. In the past, Congress has considered legislation that would impact insurance companies in numerous ways, such as providing for an optional federal charter or a federal presence for insurance, preempting state law in certain respects regarding the regulation of reinsurance, increasing federal oversight in areas such as consumer protection and solvency regulation, setting tax rates, and other matters. The Company cannot predict whether or in what form legislation will be enacted and, if so, the impact of such legislation on the Company.

The Company is also subject to various conditions and requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the "Healthcare Act"). The Healthcare Act makes significant changes to the regulation of health insurance and may affect the Company in various ways, including by potentially treating small blocks of business the Company has offered or acquired over the years as health insurance, as well as by potentially affecting the benefit plans the Company sponsors for employees or retirees and their dependents and the Company’s expenses and tax liabilities related to the provision of such benefits. In addition, the Company may be subject to regulations, guidance or determinations emanating from the various regulatory authorities authorized under the Healthcare Act, all of which could have a significant impact on the Company.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“the Dodd-Frank Act”) made sweeping changes to the regulation of financial services entities, products and markets. The Dodd-Frank Act directed existing and newly-created government agencies and bodies to perform studies and promulgate a multitude of regulations implementing the law, a process that has substantially advanced but is not yet complete. Although the current presidential administration has indicated a desire to revise or reverse some of its provisions, the fate of these proposals is unclear, and we cannot predict with certainty how the Dodd-Frank Act will continue to affect the financial markets generally, or impact our business, ratings, results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act imposed a comprehensive new regulatory regime on the over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives marketplace and granted new joint regulatory authority to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) over OTC derivatives. In collaboration with U.S. federal banking regulators, the CFTC has adopted regulations which categorize the Company as a “financial end-user” which is thereby required to post and collect margin in a variety of derivatives transactions. Recommendations and reports from entities created under the Dodd-Frank Act, such as the Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) and the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”), could also affect the manner in which insurance and reinsurance are regulated in the U.S. and, thereby, the Company’s business. The Dodd-Frank Act also created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), an independent division of the Department of Treasury with jurisdiction over credit, savings, payment, and other consumer financial products and services, other than investment products already regulated by the SEC or the CFTC. Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries sell products that may be regulated by the CFPB, and the Company is unable to predict at this time the ways in which the CFPB’s regulations might directly or indirectly affect the Company or its subsidiaries.

Sales of life insurance policies and annuity contracts offered by the Company are subject to regulations relating to sales practices adopted by a variety of federal and state regulatory authorities. Certain annuities and life insurance policies such as variable annuities and variable universal life insurance are regulated under the federal securities laws administered by the SEC. On April 18, 2018, the SEC voted to propose rulemakings and interpretations relating to the standard of conduct applicable to broker-dealers, investment advisers, and their representatives when making certain recommendations to retail customers. Specifically, under the proposed regulations, a broker-dealer would be required to act in the best interest of a retail customer when recommending any securities transaction or investment strategy involving securities to a retail customer. The SEC also proposed an interpretation reaffirming and, in some cases, clarifying its views of the fiduciary duty that investment advisers owe to their clients. Another SEC proposal would require broker-dealers and investment advisers to provide each customer with a summary of the nature of the customer’s relationship with the investment professional, as well as a restriction on the use of the terms “adviser” and “advisor” by broker-dealers. The comment period on the proposals closed on August 7, 2018. The SEC has indicated that it will issue a final version of the regulations and the interpretation before the end of the third quarter 2019.

In addition, broker-dealers, insurance agencies and other financial institutions sell the Company’s annuities to employee benefit plans governed by provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and Individual Retirement Accounts that are governed by similar provisions under the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). Consequently, our activities and

those of the firms that sell the Company’s products are subject to restrictions that require ERISA fiduciaries to perform their duties solely in the interests of ERISA plan participants and beneficiaries, and that prohibit ERISA fiduciaries from causing a covered plan or retirement account to engage in certain prohibited transactions absent an exemption.

There remains significant uncertainty surrounding the final form that these regulations may take. Our current distributors may continue to move forward with their plans to limit the number of products they offer, including the types of products offered by the Company. The Company may find it necessary to change sales representative and/or broker compensation, to limit the assistance or advice it can provide to owners of the Company’s annuities, to replace or engage additional distributors, or otherwise change the manner in which it designs, supervises, and supports sales of its annuities and, where applicable, life insurance products. In addition, the Company continues to incur expenses in connection with initial and ongoing compliance obligations with respect to such rules, and in the aggregate these expenses may be significant. Any of the foregoing regulatory, legislative, or judicial measures or the reaction to such activity by consumers or other members of the insurance industry could have a material adverse impact on our ability to sell annuities and other products, to retain in-force business, and on our financial condition or results of operations.

Certain life insurance policies, contracts, and annuities offered by the Company are subject to regulation under the federal securities laws administered by the SEC. The federal securities laws contain regulatory restrictions and criminal, administrative, and private remedial provisions. From time to time, the SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) examine or investigate the activities of broker-dealers and investment advisers, including the Company’s affiliated broker-dealers and investment advisers. These examinations or investigations often focus on the activities of the registered representatives and registered investment advisers doing business through such entities and the entities’ supervision of those persons.

The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 includes anti-money laundering and financial transparency laws as well as various regulations applicable to broker-dealers and other financial services companies, including insurance companies. Financial institutions are required to collect information regarding the identity of their customers, watch for and report suspicious transactions, respond to requests for information by regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies and share information with other financial institutions. As a result, the Company is required to maintain certain internal compliance practices, procedures, and controls.

Cyber Security Regulation

In response to the growing threat of cyber attacks in the insurance industry, certain jurisdictions have begun to consider new cybersecurity measures, including the adoption of cybersecurity regulations that, among other things, would require insurance companies to establish and maintain a cybersecurity program and implement and maintain cybersecurity policies and procedures. On October 24, 2017, the NAIC adopted its Insurance Data Security Model Law (the “NAIC Model Law”), which is intended to serve as model legislation for states to enact in order to govern cybersecurity and data protection practices of insurers, insurance agents, and other licensed entities registered under state insurance laws. To date, South Carolina, Michigan, and Ohio have adopted cybersecurity regulations that are based, at least in part, on the NAIC’s Model Law, and several other states have pending or are considering adopting regulations based on the NAIC Model Law. Additionally, the New York Department of Financial Services (“DFS”) issued regulations governing cybersecurity requirements for financial services companies, which became effective in March 2017. The DFS regulations require insurance companies, among others, licensed in New York to assess their specific cyber risk profiles and design cybersecurity programs to address such risks, as well as file annually with DFS a program compliance certification pertaining to their compliance with DFS cybersecurity requirements. The Company continues to monitor whether the other states in which it conducts business, as well as federal governmental agencies, adopt data security laws.

The Company has implemented information security policies that are designed to address the security of the Company’s information assets, which include personally identifiable information (“PII”) and protected health information (“PHI”), as well as other proprietary and confidential information about the Company, its employees, customers, agents, and business partners. Additionally, the Company has an information risk management committee that, among other things, reviews emerging risks and monitors regulatory requirements and industry standards relating to the security of the Company’s information assets, monitors the Company’s cybersecurity initiatives, and approves the Company’s cyber incident response plans. This committee meets regularly, and the Board of Directors receives reports regarding cybersecurity matters. Furthermore, as part of the Company’s information security program, the Company has included security features in its systems that are intended to protect the privacy and integrity of the Company’s information assets, including PII and PHI. Notwithstanding these efforts, cyber threats and related legal and regulatory standards applicable to the insurance industry are rapidly evolving, and the Company’s and the Company’s business partners’ and service providers’ systems may continue to be vulnerable to security breaches, viruses, programming errors, and other similar disruptive problems or incidents. Any such incident could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operations, reputation, customer relationships, and financial condition.

Other Regulation    

Other types of regulation that could affect the Company and its subsidiaries include insurance company investment laws and regulations, state statutory accounting practices, tax laws, antitrust laws, minimum solvency requirements, enterprise risk requirements, state securities laws, federal privacy laws, technology and data regulations, insurable interest laws, federal anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism laws, employment and immigration laws and, because the Company owns and operates real property, state, federal, and local environmental laws. The Company may also be subject to regulations influenced by or related to international regulatory authorities or initiatives. The Company’s sole stockholder, Dai-ichi Life, is subject to regulation by the Japanese Financial Services Authority (“JFSA”). Under applicable laws and regulations, Dai-ichi Life is required to provide notice to or obtain the consent of the JFSA prior to taking certain actions or engaging in certain transactions, either directly or indirectly through its subsidiaries, including the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries. Domestically, the NAIC may be influenced by

the initiatives or regulatory structures or schemes of international regulatory bodies, and those initiatives or regulatory structures or schemes may not translate readily into the regulatory structures or schemes of the legal system (including the interpretation or application of standards by juries) under which U.S. insurers must operate. Changes in laws and regulations or in interpretations thereof, or to initiatives or regulatory structures or schemes of international regulatory bodies, which are applicable to the Company could have a significant adverse impact on the Company.

Additional issues related to regulation of the Company and its insurance subsidiaries are discussed in Item 1A, Risk Factors, and in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations , included herein.

Employees

As of December 31, 2018 , the Company had approximately 2,957 employees, of which 2,948 were full-time and 9 were part-time employees. Included in the total were approximately 1,568 employees in Birmingham, Alabama, of which 1,562 were full-time and 6 were part-time employees. None of the Company’s employees are represented by a union and the Company is not a party to any collective bargaining agreements. The Company believes its relations with its employees are satisfactory. Most employees are covered by contributory major medical, dental, vision, group life, and long-term disability insurance plans. The cost of these benefits to the Company in 2018 was approximately $17.8 million. In addition, substantially all of the employees may participate in a defined benefit pension plan and 401(k) plan. The Company matches employee contributions to its 401(k) plan. See Note 16, Employee Benefit Plans to our consolidated financial statements for additional information.

Intellectual Property

The Company relies on a combination of intellectual property laws, confidentiality procedures and policies, and contractual provisions to protect its brand and its intellectual property, which includes copyrights, trademarks, patents, domain names, and trade secrets. The success of the Company’s business depends on its continued ability to use and protect its intellectual property, including its trademark and service mark portfolio which is composed of both United States registered and common law trademarks and service marks, including the Company’s Protective name and logo. The Company’s intellectual property assets are valuable to the Company in maintaining its brand and marketing its products; thus, the Company maintains and protects its intellectual property assets from infringement and dilution.

Available Information

The Company files reports with the SEC, including Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and other reports as required. The Company is an electronic filer and the SEC maintains an internet site at http://www.sec.gov that contains the Company’s annual, quarterly, and current reports and other information filed electronically by the Company.

The Company makes available free of charge through its website, http://www.protective.com, the Company’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. The information found on the Company’s website is not part of this or any other report filed with or furnished to the SEC. The Company will furnish such documents to anyone who requests such copies in writing. Requests for copies should be directed to: Financial Information, Protective Life Corporation, P.O. Box 2606, Birmingham, Alabama 35202, Telephone (205) 268-3912, Fax (205) 268-3642.

We also make available to the public current information, including financial information, regarding the Company and our affiliates on the Financial Information page of our website, www.protective.com. We encourage investors, the media and others interested in us and our affiliates to review the information posted on our website. The information found on the Company’s website is not part of this or any other report filed with or furnished to the SEC.

The Company has adopted a Code of Business Conduct, which applies to all directors, officers and employees of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. The Code of Business Conduct incorporates a code of ethics that applies to the principal executive officer and all financial officers of the Company and its subsidiaries. The Code of Conduct is available on the Company’s website, http://investor.protective.com/corporate-governance/code-of-conduct.

Item 1A.    Risk Factors

The operating results of companies in the insurance industry have historically been subject to significant fluctuations. The factors which could affect the Company’s future results include, but are not limited to, general economic conditions and known trends and uncertainties which are discussed more fully below.

General Risk Factors

The Company is controlled by Dai-ichi Life, which has the ability to make important decisions affecting our business.

As of February 1, 2015, the date of completion of our merger, all of our common stock became owned by Dai-ichi Life Insurance Company, Limited (now known as Dai-ichi Life Holdings, Inc., “Dai-ichi Life”). As the holder of 100% of our voting stock, Dai-ichi Life is entitled to elect all of our directors, to approve any action requiring the approval of the holders of our voting stock, including adopting amendments to our certificate of incorporation and approving mergers or sales of substantially all of our assets, and to prevent any transaction that requires the approval of stockholders. Dai-ichi Life has effective control over our affairs, policies and operations, such as the appointment of management, future issuances of our securities, the payments of distributions by us, if any, in respect of our common stock, the incurrence of debt by us, and the entering into of extraordinary transactions, and

Dai-ichi Life’s interests may not in all cases be aligned with the interests of investors, including holders of our debt securities. Additionally, our credit agreement and indentures permit us to pay dividends and make other restricted payments to Dai-ichi Life under certain circumstances, and Dai-ichi Life may have an interest in our doing so. Dai-ichi Life has no obligation to provide us with any additional debt or equity financing.

The Company is exposed to risks related to natural and man-made disasters and catastrophes, such as diseases, epidemics, pandemics, malicious acts, cyber attacks, terrorist acts, and climate change, which could adversely affect the Company’s operations and results.

While the Company has obtained insurance, implemented risk management and contingency plans, and taken preventive measures and other precautions, no predictions of specific scenarios can be made and such measures may not adequately predict the impact on the Company from such events. A natural or man-made disaster or catastrophe, including a severe weather or geological event such as a storm, tornado, fire, flood, earthquake, disease, epidemic, pandemic, malicious act, cyber attack, terrorist act, or the effects of climate change, could cause the Company’s workforce to be unable to engage in operations at one or more of its facilities or result in short- or long-term interruptions in the Company’s business operations, any of which could be material to the Company’s operating results for a particular period. Certain of these events could also adversely affect the mortality, morbidity, or other experience of the Company or its reinsurers and have a significant negative impact on the Company. In addition, claims arising from the occurrence of such events or conditions could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Such events or conditions could also have an adverse effect on lapses and surrenders of existing policies, as well as sales of new policies. In addition, such events or conditions could result in a decrease or halt in economic activity in large geographic areas, adversely affecting the Company’s business within such geographic areas and/or the general economic climate. Such events or conditions could also result in additional regulation or restrictions on the Company in the conduct of its business. The possible macroeconomic effects of such events or conditions could also adversely affect the Company’s asset portfolio, as well as many other aspects of the Company’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.

A disruption or cyber attack affecting the electronic, communication and information technology systems or other technologies of the Company or those on whom the Company relies could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In conducting its business, the Company relies extensively on various electronic systems, including computer systems, networks, data processing and administrative systems, and communication systems. The Company’s business partners, counterparties, service providers, and distributors also rely on such systems, as do securities exchanges and financial markets that are important to the Company’s ability to conduct its business. These systems or their functionality could be disabled, disrupted, damaged, or destroyed by intentional or unintentional acts or events such as cyber attacks, viruses, sabotage, unauthorized tampering, physical or electronic break-ins or other security breaches, acts of war or terrorism, human error, system failures, failures of power or water supply, or the loss or malfunction of other utilities or services. They may also be disabled, disrupted, damaged, or destroyed by natural events such as storms, tornadoes, fires, floods or earthquakes. Disruption, damage, or destruction of any of these systems could cause the Company or others on whom the Company relies to be unable to conduct business for an extended period of time or could result in significant expenditures to replace, repair, or reinstate functionality, which could materially adversely impact the Company’s business and its financial condition and results of operations.

While the Company and others on whom it depends try to identify threats and implement measures to protect their systems, such protective measures may not be sufficient. Additionally, we may not become aware of sophisticated cyber attacks for some time after they occur, which could increase the Company’s exposure. We may have to incur significant costs to address or remediate interruptions, threats, and vulnerabilities in our information and technology systems and to comply with existing and future regulatory requirements related thereto. These risks are heightened as the frequency and sophistication of cyber attacks increase.

The Company has relationships with vendors, distributors, and other third parties that provide operational or information technology services to us. Although the Company conducts due diligence, negotiates contractual provisions, and, in many cases, conducts periodic reviews of such third parties to confirm compliance with our information security standards, the failure of such third parties’ computer systems and/or their disaster recovery plans for any reason might cause significant interruptions in our operations. While we maintain cyber liability insurance that provides both third-party liability and first party liability coverages, our insurance may not be sufficient to protect us against all losses.

Confidential information maintained in the systems of the Company or other parties upon which the Company relies could be compromised or misappropriated as a result of security breaches or other related lapses or incidents, damaging the Company’s business and reputation and adversely affecting its financial condition and results of operations.

In the course of conducting its business, the Company retains confidential information, including information about its customers and proprietary business information. The Company retains confidential information in various electronic systems, including computer systems, networks, data processing and administrative systems, and communication systems. The Company maintains physical, administrative, and technical safeguards to protect the information and it relies on commercial technologies to maintain the security of its systems and to maintain the security of its transmission of such information to other parties, including its business partners, counterparties and service providers. The Company’s business partners, counterparties and service providers likewise maintain confidential information, including, in some cases, customer information, on behalf of the Company. An intentional or unintentional breach or compromise of the security measures of the Company or such other parties could result in the disclosure, misappropriation, misuse, alteration, or destruction of the confidential information retained by or on behalf of the Company, or the inability of the Company to conduct business for an indeterminate amount of time. Any of these events or circumstances could damage the Company’s business and adversely affect its financial condition and results of operations by, among other things, causing harm to the Company’s business operations, reputation and customers, deterring customers and others

from doing business with the Company, subjecting the Company to significant regulatory, civil, and criminal liability, and requiring the Company to incur significant legal and other expenses.

Despite our efforts to ensure the integrity of our systems, it is possible that we may not be able to anticipate and implement effective preventative or detective measures against security breaches of all types because the techniques used to attack technologies and data systems change frequently or are not recognized until launched and because cyber attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources or parties. Those parties may also attempt to fraudulently induce employees, customers, or other users of our system, through phishing, phone calls, or other efforts, to deliberately or inadvertently disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our data or that of our customers or clients.

Additionally, cyber threats and related legal and regulatory standards applicable to our business are rapidly evolving and may subject the Company to heightened legal standards, new theories of liability, and material claims and penalties that we cannot currently predict or anticipate. As cyber threats and applicable legal standards continue to evolve, the Company may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures and computer systems, and to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities. If the Company experiences cyber attacks or other data security events or other technological failures or lapses, including unauthorized access to, loss of, or acquisition of information collected or maintained by the Company or its business partners or vendors, the Company may be subject to regulatory inquiries or proceedings, litigation or reputational damage, or be required to pay claims, fines, or penalties. While the Company has experienced cyber-events and other data security events in the past, and to date the Company has not suffered any material harm or loss relating to such attacks, events, failures or lapses at the Company or third parties, there can be no assurance that the Company will not suffer such harm or losses in the future.

The Company’s results and financial condition may be negatively affected should actual experience differ from management’s models, assumptions, or estimates.

In the conduct of business, the Company makes certain assumptions and utilizes certain internal models regarding mortality, morbidity, persistency, expenses, interest rates, equity markets, tax, business mix, casualty, contingent liabilities, investment performance, and other factors appropriate to the type of business it expects to experience in future periods. These assumptions and models are used to estimate the amounts of deferred policy acquisition costs, policy liabilities and accruals, future earnings, and various components of the Company’s balance sheet. These assumptions and models are also used in the operation of the Company’s business in making decisions crucial to the success of the Company, including the pricing of acquisitions and products. The Company’s actual experience, as well as changes in estimates, is used to prepare the Company’s financial statements. To the extent the Company’s actual experience and changes in estimates differ from original estimates, the Company’s financial condition may be adversely affected.

Mortality, morbidity, and casualty assumptions incorporate underlying assumptions about many factors. Such factors may include, for example, how a product is distributed, for what purpose the product is purchased, the mix of customers purchasing the products, persistency and lapses, future progress in the fields of health and medicine, and the projected level of used vehicle values. Actual mortality, morbidity, and/or casualty experience may differ from expectations derived from the Company’s models. In addition, continued activity in the viatical, stranger-owned, and/or life settlement industry could cause the Company’s level of lapses to differ from its assumptions about premium persistency and lapses, which could negatively impact the Company’s performance.

Additionally, the calculations the Company uses to estimate various components of its balance sheet and statements of income are necessarily complex and involve analyzing and interpreting large quantities of data. The Company currently employs various techniques for such calculations and relies, in certain instances, on third parties to make or assist in making such calculations. From time to time it develops and implements more sophisticated administrative systems and procedures capable of facilitating the calculation of more precise estimates. The systems and procedures that the Company develops and the Company’s reliance upon third parties could result in errors in the calculations that impact our financial statements or affect our financial condition.

Models, assumptions and estimates involve judgment, and by their nature are imprecise and subject to changes and revisions over time. Accordingly, the Company’s results may be affected, positively or negatively, from time to time, by errors in the design, implementation, or use of its models, actual results differing from assumptions, by changes in estimates, and by changes resulting from implementing more sophisticated administrative systems and procedures that facilitate the calculation of more precise estimates.

The Company may not realize its anticipated financial results from its acquisitions strategy.

The Company’s Acquisitions segment focuses on the acquisitions of companies and business operations, and the coinsurance of blocks of insurance business, all of which have increased the Company’s earnings. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will have future suitable opportunities for, or sufficient capital available to fund, such transactions. If our competitors have access to capital on more favorable terms or at a lower cost, our ability to compete for acquisitions may be diminished. In addition, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to realize any projected operating efficiencies or achieve the anticipated financial results from such transactions.

The Company may be unable to complete an acquisition transaction. Completion of an acquisition transaction may be more costly or take longer than expected, or may have a different or more costly financing structure than initially contemplated. In addition, the Company may not be able to complete or manage multiple acquisition transactions at the same time, or the completion of such transactions may be delayed or be more costly than initially contemplated. The Company, its affiliates, or other parties to the transaction may be unable to obtain regulatory approvals required to complete an acquisition transaction. If the

Company identifies and completes suitable acquisitions, it may not be able to successfully integrate the business in a timely or cost-effective manner, or retain key personnel and business relationships necessary to achieve anticipated financial results. In addition, a number of risks may arise in connection with businesses or blocks of insurance business that the Company acquires or reinsures, including unforeseen liabilities or asset impairments; rating agency reactions; and regulatory requirements that could impact our operations or capital requirements. Additionally, in connection with its acquisition transactions that involve reinsurance, the Company assumes, or otherwise becomes responsible for, the obligations of policies and other liabilities of other insurers. Any regulatory, legal, financial, or other adverse development affecting the other insurer could also have an adverse effect on the Company.

The Company may experience competition in its acquisition segment.

The Company also faces significant competition in its acquisitions segment, including with respect to the acquisition of suitable target companies, business operations, and blocks of reinsurance business. Other market participants may have competitive advantages, including with respect to access to capital (whether on more favorable terms or at a lower cost), investment return requirements, taxation, and risk tolerances.

Assets allocated to the MONY Closed Block benefit only the holders of certain policies; adverse performance of Closed Block assets or adverse experience of Closed Block liabilities may negatively affect the Company.

On October 1, 2013, the Company completed the acquisition of MONY Life Insurance Company (“MONY”) from AXA Financial, Inc. MONY was converted from a mutual insurance company to a stock corporation in accordance with its Plan of Reorganization dated August 14, 1998, as amended. In connection with its demutualization, an accounting mechanism known as a closed block (the “Closed Block”) was established for the benefit of policyholders who owned certain individual insurance policies of MONY in force as of the date of demutualization. Please refer to Note 4, MONY Closed Block of Business , to the consolidated financial statements for a more detailed description of the Closed Block.

Assets allocated to the Closed Block inure solely to the benefit of the Closed Block’s policyholders and will not revert to the benefit of the Company. However, if the Closed Block has insufficient funds to make guaranteed policy benefit payments, such payments must be made from assets outside the Closed Block. Adverse financial or investment performance of the Closed Block, or adverse mortality or lapse experience on policies in the Closed Block, may require MONY to pay policyholder benefits using assets outside the Closed Block, which events could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations and negatively affect the Company’s risk-based capital ratios. In addition, regulatory actions could require payment of dividends to policyholders in a larger amount than is anticipated by the Company, which could have a material adverse impact on the Company.

The Company is dependent on the performance of others.

The Company’s results may be affected by the performance of others because the Company has entered into various arrangements involving other parties. For example, variable life and annuity deposits are invested in funds managed by third parties, certain modified coinsurance assets are managed by third parties, and the Company enters into derivative transactions with various counterparties and clearinghouses. The Company may rely upon third parties to administer certain portions of its business or business that it reinsures. Any of the other parties upon which the Company depends may default on their obligations to the Company due to bankruptcy, insolvency, lack of liquidity, adverse economic conditions, operational failure, fraud, or other reasons. Such defaults could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Certain of these other parties may act on behalf of the Company or represent the Company in various capacities. Consequently, the Company may be held responsible for obligations that arise from the acts or omissions of these other parties.

Most of the Company’s products are sold through independent third-party distribution channels. There can be no assurance that the terms of these relationships will remain acceptable to us or the distributors, as they are subject to change as a result of business combinations, mergers, consolidation, or changes in business models, compensation arrangements, or new distribution channels. If one or more key distributors terminated their relationship with us, increased the costs of selling our products, or reduced the amount of sales they produce for us, our results of operations could be adversely affected. If we are unsuccessful in attracting and retaining key associates who conduct our business, sales of our products could decline and our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Because our products are distributed through unaffiliated third-party distributors, we may not be able to fully monitor or control the manner of their distribution despite our training and compliance programs. If our products are distributed by such firms in an inappropriate manner, or to customers for whom they are unsuitable, we may suffer reputational and other harm to our business. In addition, our distributors may also sell our competitors’ products. If our competitors offer products that are more attractive than ours, or pay higher compensation than we do, these distributors may concentrate their efforts on selling our competitors’ products instead of ours.

The Company’s risk management policies, practices, and procedures could leave it exposed to unidentified or unanticipated risks, which could negatively affect its business or result in losses.

The Company has developed risk management policies and procedures and expects to continue enhancing them in the future. Nonetheless, the Company’s policies and procedures to identify, monitor, and manage both internal and external risks may not predict future exposures, which could be different or significantly greater than expected.

These identified risks may not be the only risks facing the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to the Company, or those that it currently deems to be immaterial, may adversely affect its business, financial condition and/or results of operations.

The Company’s strategies for mitigating risks arising from its day-to-day operations may prove ineffective resulting in a material adverse effect on its results of operations and financial condition.

The Company’s performance is highly dependent on its ability to manage risks that arise from a large number of its day-to-day business activities, including, but not limited to, policy pricing, reserving and valuation, underwriting, claims processing, policy administration and servicing, administration of reinsurance, execution of its investment and hedging strategy, financial and tax reporting, and other activities, many of which are very complex. The Company also may rely on third parties for such activities. The Company seeks to monitor and control its exposure to risks arising out of or related to these activities through a variety of internal controls, management review processes, and other mechanisms. However, the occurrence of unanticipated risks, or the occurrence of risks of a greater magnitude than expected, including those arising from a failure in processes, procedures or systems implemented by the Company or a failure on the part of employees or third parties upon which the Company relies in this regard, may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

Events that damage our reputation or the reputation of our industry could adversely impact our business, results of operations, or financial condition.     

There are events which could harm our reputation, including, but not limited to, regulatory investigations, adverse media commentary, legal proceedings, and cyber or other information security events. Depending on the severity of damage to our reputation, our sales of new business, and/or retention of existing business could be negatively impacted, and our ability to compete for acquisition transactions or engage in financial transactions may be diminished, all of which could adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition.

As with all financial services companies, the Company’s ability to conduct business is dependent upon consumer confidence in the industry and its products. Actions of competitors and financial difficulties of other companies in the industry could undermine consumer confidence and adversely affect retention of existing business and future sales of the Company’s insurance and investment products.

The Company may not be able to protect its intellectual property and may be subject to infringement claims.

The Company relies on a combination of contractual rights and copyright, trademark, patent, and trade secret laws to establish and protect its intellectual property. Although the Company uses a broad range of measures to protect its intellectual property rights, third parties may infringe or misappropriate its intellectual property. The Company may have to litigate to enforce and protect its copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, and know-how or to determine their scope, validity, or enforceability, which represents a diversion of resources that may be significant in amount and may not prove successful. The loss of intellectual property protection or the inability to secure or enforce the protection of the Company’s intellectual property assets could have a material adverse effect on its business and ability to compete.

The Company also may be subject to costly litigation in the event that another party alleges its operations or activities infringe upon that party’s intellectual property rights. Third parties may have, or may eventually be issued, patents that could be infringed by the Company’s products, methods, processes, or services. Any party that holds such a patent could make a claim of infringement against the Company. The Company may also be subject to claims by third parties for infringement of copyright and trademarks, violation of trade secrets, or breach of license usage rights. Any such claims and any resulting litigation could result in significant liability for damages. If the Company were found to have infringed third party patent or other intellectual property rights, it could incur substantial liability, and in some circumstances could be enjoined from providing certain products or services to its customers or utilizing and benefiting from certain methods, processes, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, or licenses, or alternatively could be required to enter into costly licensing arrangements with third parties, all of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Developments in technology may impact our business.

Technological developments and unforeseen changes in technology may impact our business. Technology changes are increasing customer choices about how to interact with companies generally. Evolving customer preferences may drive a need to redesign our products, and our distribution channels and customer service areas may need to change to become more automated and available at the place and time of the customer’s choosing. Additionally, changes in technology may impact our operational effectiveness and could have an adverse effect on our unit cost competitiveness. Such changes have the potential to disrupt our business model.

Technology may also have a significant impact on the companies in which we invest. For example, consumers may change their purchasing behavior to favor online shopping activity, which may adversely affect the value of retail properties in which we invest.

Advancements in medical technologies may also impact our business. For example, genetic testing and the availability of that information unequally to consumers and insurers can result in anti-selection risks if data from genetic testing gives our prospective customers a clearer view into their future health and longevity expectations, allowing them to select products protecting them against likelihoods of mortality or longevity with more precision based on information that is not available to us. Also, advancements in medical technologies that extend lives may challenge our actuarial assumptions, especially in the annuity business.

Risks Related to the Financial Environment

Interest rate fluctuations and sustained periods of low or high interest rates could negatively affect the Company’s interest earnings and spread income, or otherwise impact its business.

Significant changes in interest rates expose the Company to the risk of not earning anticipated interest on products without significant account balances, or not realizing anticipated spreads between the interest rate earned on investments and the credited interest rates paid on in-force policies and contracts that have significant account balances. Both rising and declining interest rates as well as sustained periods of low interest rates could negatively affect the Company’s interest earnings and spread income.

Additionally, changes or reforms to London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”), or uncertainty regarding the reliability or continued use of LIBOR as a benchmark interest rate, may impact interest rates in the markets in which the Company conducts business. Alternative reference rates, including the Secured Overnight Funding Rate (“SOFR”), have been announced, and it is unclear how markets will respond to these new rates, the effect of changes or reforms to LIBOR, or discontinuation of LIBOR. If LIBOR ceases to exist or if the methods of calculating LIBOR change from current methods for any reason, interest rates on certain derivatives and floating rate securities we hold, securities we have issued, real estate lending and related activities we conduct in our investment management business, and any other assets or liabilities whose value is tied to LIBOR, may be adversely affected. Further, any uncertainty regarding the continued use and reliability of LIBOR as a benchmark interest rate could adversely affect the value of such instruments.

Lower interest rates may also result in lower sales of certain of the Company’s life insurance and annuity products. Additionally, during periods of declining or low interest rates, certain previously-issued life insurance and annuity products may be relatively more attractive investments to consumers, resulting in increased premium payments on products with flexible premium features, repayment of policy loans, and increased persistency, or a higher percentage of insurance policies remaining in force from year to year during a period when the Company’s investments earn lower returns. Certain of the Company’s life insurance and annuity products guarantee a minimum credited interest rate, and the Company could become unable to earn its spread income or may earn less interest on its investments than it is required to credit to policyholders should interest rates decrease significantly and/or remain low for sustained periods. Additionally, the profitability of certain of the Company’s life insurance products that do not have significant account balances could be reduced should interest rates decrease significantly and/or remain low for sustained periods.

The Company’s expectations for future interest earnings and spreads are important components in amortization of deferred acquisition costs (“DAC”) and value of business acquired (“VOBA”), and significantly lower interest earnings or spreads may accelerate amortization, thereby reducing net income in the affected reporting period. Sustained periods of low interest rates could also result in an increase in the valuation of the future policy benefit or policyholder account balance liabilities associated with the Company’s products.

Higher interest rates may create a less favorable environment for the origination of mortgage loans and decrease the investment income the Company receives in the form of prepayment fees, make-whole payments, and mortgage participation income. Higher interest rates would also adversely affect the market value of fixed-income securities within the Company’s investment portfolio. Higher interest rates may also increase the cost of debt and other obligations of the Company having floating rate or rate reset provisions. During periods of increasing market interest rates, the Company may offer higher crediting rates on interest-sensitive products, such as universal life insurance and fixed annuities, and it may increase crediting rates on in-force products to keep these products competitive. In addition, rapidly-rising interest rates may cause increased policy surrenders, withdrawals from life insurance policies and annuity contracts, and requests for policy loans as policyholders and contract holders shift assets into higher yielding investments. Increases in crediting rates, as well as surrenders and withdrawals, could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations, including earnings, equity (including accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (“AOCI”)), and statutory risk-based capital ratios.

Additionally, the Company’s asset/liability management programs and procedures incorporate assumptions about the relationship between short-term and long-term interest rates (i.e., the slope of the yield curve) and relationships between risk-adjusted and risk-free interest rates, market liquidity, and other factors. The effectiveness of the Company’s asset/liability management programs and procedures may be negatively affected whenever actual results differ from these assumptions. In general, the Company’s results of operations improve when the yield curve is positively sloped (i.e., when long-term interest rates are higher than short-term interest rates), and will be adversely affected by a flat or negatively-sloped curve.

The Company’s investments are subject to market and credit risks. These risks could be heightened during periods of extreme volatility or disruption in financial and credit markets.

Significant volatility or disruption in domestic or foreign credit markets, including as a result of social or political unrest or instability domestically or abroad, could have an adverse impact in several ways on either the Company’s financial condition or results from operations. The Company’s invested assets and derivative financial instruments are subject to risks of credit defaults and changes in market values which could be heightened by volatility or disruption. The factors affecting the financial and credit markets could lead to other-than-temporary impairments of assets in the Company’s investment portfolio.

The value of the Company’s commercial mortgage loan portfolio depends in part on the financial condition of the tenants occupying the properties that the Company has financed. The value of the Company’s investment portfolio, including its portfolio of government debt obligations, debt obligations of those entities with an express or implied governmental guarantee, and debt obligations of other issuers holding a large amount of such obligations, depends in part on the ability of the issuers or guarantors of such debt to maintain their credit ratings and meet their contractual obligations. Factors that may affect the overall default rate

on, and market value of, the Company’s invested assets, derivative financial instruments, and mortgage loans include interest rate levels, financial market performance, general economic conditions, and conditions affecting certain sectors of the economy, as well as particular circumstances affecting the individual tenants, borrowers, issuers, and guarantors.

Significant continued financial and credit market volatility, changes in interest rates and credit spreads, credit defaults, real estate values, market illiquidity, declines in equity prices, acts of corporate malfeasance, ratings downgrades of the issuers or guarantors of these investments, and declines in general economic conditions and conditions affecting certain sectors of the economy, either alone or in combination, could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows through realized losses, impairments, changes in unrealized loss positions, and increased demands on capital, including obligations to post additional capital and collateral. In addition, market volatility can make it difficult for the Company to value certain of its assets, especially if trading becomes less frequent. Valuations may include assumptions or estimates that may have significant period-to-period changes that could have an adverse impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.

Credit market volatility or disruption could adversely impact the Company’s financial condition or results from operations.

Changes in interest rates and credit spreads could cause market price and cash flow variability in the fixed-income instruments in the Company’s investment portfolio. A widening of credit spreads will increase the unrealized losses in the Company’s investment portfolio. Significant volatility and lack of liquidity in the credit markets could cause issuers of the fixed-income securities in the Company’s investment portfolio to default on either principal or interest payments on these securities. Additionally, market price valuations may not accurately reflect the underlying expected cash flows of securities within the Company’s investment portfolio.

The Company’s statutory surplus is also impacted by widening credit spreads as a result of the accounting for the assets and liabilities on its fixed market value adjusted (“MVA”) annuities. Statutory separate account assets supporting the fixed MVA annuities are recorded at fair value. In determining the statutory reserve for the fixed MVA annuities, the Company is required to use current crediting rates based on U.S. Treasuries. In many capital market scenarios, current crediting rates based on U.S. Treasuries are highly correlated with market rates implicit in the fair value of statutory separate account assets. As a result, the change in the statutory reserve from period to period will likely substantially offset the change in the fair value of the statutory separate account assets. However, in periods of volatile credit markets, actual credit spreads on investment assets may increase sharply for certain sub-sectors of the overall credit market, resulting in statutory separate account asset market value losses. Credit spreads are not consistently fully reflected in crediting rates based on U.S. Treasuries, and the calculation of statutory reserves will not substantially offset the change in fair value of the statutory separate account assets resulting in reductions in statutory surplus. This situation would result in the need to devote significant additional capital to support fixed MVA annuity products.

The ability of the Company to implement financing solutions designed to fund a portion of statutory reserves on both the traditional and universal life blocks of business is dependent upon factors such as the ratings of the Company, the size of the blocks of business affected, the mortality experience of the Company, the credit markets, and other factors. The Company cannot predict the continued availability of such solutions or the form that the market may dictate. To the extent that such financing solutions were desired but are not available, the Company’s financial position could be adversely affected through impacts including, but not limited to, higher borrowing costs, surplus strain, lower sales capacity, and possible reduced earnings.

Disruption of the capital and credit markets could negatively affect the Company’s ability to meet its liquidity and financing needs.

The Company needs liquidity to meet its obligations to its policyholders and its debt holders, to pay its operating expenses, interest on our debt and dividends on our capital stock, to provide our subsidiaries with cash or collateral, maintain our securities lending activities and to replace certain maturing liabilities. Volatility or disruption in the credit markets could also impact the Company’s ability to efficiently access financial solutions for purposes of issuing long-term debt for financing purposes, its ability to obtain financial solutions for purposes of supporting certain traditional and universal life insurance products for capital management purposes, or result in an increase in the cost of existing securitization structures. Without sufficient liquidity, we could be forced to curtail our operations and limit our investments, and our business and financial results may suffer. The Company’s sources of liquidity include insurance premiums, annuity considerations, deposit funds, cash flow from investments and assets, and other income from its operations. In normal credit and capital market conditions, the Company’s sources of liquidity also include a variety of short-term and long-term borrowing arrangements, including issuing debt securities.

The Company’s business is dependent on the capital and credit markets, including confidence in such markets. When the credit and capital markets are disrupted and confidence is eroded the Company may not be able to borrow money, including through the issuance of debt securities, or the cost of borrowing or raising capital may be prohibitively high. If the Company’s internal sources of liquidity are inadequate during such periods, the Company could suffer negative effects from not being able to borrow money, or from having to do so on unfavorable terms. The negative effects could include being forced to sell assets at a loss, a lowering of the Company’s credit ratings and the financial strength ratings of its insurance subsidiaries, and the possibility that customers, lenders, ratings agencies, or regulators develop a negative perception of the Company’s financial prospects, which could lead to further adverse effects on the Company.

Equity market volatility could negatively impact the Company’s business.

Volatility in equity markets may deter prospective purchasers of variable life and annuity products and fixed annuity products that have returns linked to the performance of equity markets and may cause some existing customers to withdraw cash values or reduce investments in those products. The amount of policy fees received from variable products is affected by the

performance of the equity markets, increasing or decreasing as markets rise or fall. Decreases in policy fees could materially and adversely affect the profitability of our variable annuity products.

Equity market volatility can also affect the profitability of annuity products with riders. The estimated cost of providing guaranteed minimum death benefits (“GMDB”) and guaranteed living withdrawal benefits (“GLWB”) incorporates various assumptions about the overall performance of equity markets over certain time periods. Periods of significant and sustained downturns in equity markets or increased equity market volatility could result in an increase in the valuation of the future policy benefit or policyholder account balance liabilities associated with such products. While these liabilities are hedged, there still may be a possible resulting negative impact to net income and to the statutory capital and risk-based capital ratios of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries.

The amortization of DAC relating to annuity products and the estimated cost of providing GMDB and GLWB incorporate various assumptions about the overall performance of equity markets over certain time periods. The rate of amortization of DAC and the cost of providing GMDB and GLWB could increase if equity market performance is worse than assumed.

The Company’s use of derivative financial instruments within its risk management strategy may not be effective or sufficient.

The Company uses derivative financial instruments within its risk management strategy to mitigate risks to which it is exposed, including risks related to credit and equity markets, interest rate levels, foreign exchange, and volatility on its fixed indexed annuity and variable annuity products and associated guaranteed benefit features. The Company may also use derivative financial instruments within its risk management strategy to mitigate risks arising from its exposure to investments in individual issuers or sectors of issuers and to mitigate the adverse effects of interest rate levels or volatility on its overall financial condition or results of operations.

These derivative financial instruments may not effectively offset the changes in the carrying value of the exposures due to, among other things, the time lag between changes in the value of such exposures and the changes in the value of the derivative financial instruments purchased by the Company, extreme credit and/or equity market and/or interest rate levels or volatility, contract holder behavior that differs from the Company’s expectations, and basis risk.

The use of derivative financial instruments by the Company generally to hedge various risks that impact GAAP earnings may have an adverse impact on the level of statutory capital and risk-based capital ratios because earnings are recognized differently under GAAP and statutory accounting methods.

The Company may also choose not to hedge, in whole or in part, these or other risks that it has identified, due to, for example, the availability and/or cost of a suitable derivative financial instrument. In addition, the Company may fail to identify risks, or the magnitude of risks, to which it is exposed. The derivative financial instruments used by the Company in its risk management strategy may not be properly designed, may not be properly implemented as designed and/or may be insufficient to hedge the risks in relation to the Company’s obligations.

The Company is subject to the risk that its derivative counterparties or clearinghouse may fail or refuse to meet their obligations to the Company, which may result in associated derivative financial instruments becoming ineffective or inefficient.

The above factors, either alone or in combination, may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s ability to grow depends in large part upon the continued availability of capital.

The Company deploys significant amounts of capital to support its sales and acquisitions efforts. Although the Company believes it has sufficient capital to fund its immediate capital needs, the amount of capital available can vary significantly from period to period due to a variety of circumstances, some of which are not predictable or within the Company’s control. Furthermore, our sole stockholder is not obligated to provide us with additional capital. A lack of sufficient capital could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations.

The Company could be forced to sell investments at a loss to cover policyholder withdrawals.

Many of the products offered by the Company allow policyholders and contract holders to withdraw their funds under defined circumstances. The Company manages its liabilities and configures its investment portfolios so as to provide and maintain sufficient liquidity to support expected withdrawal demands and contract benefits and maturities. While the Company owns a significant amount of liquid assets, a certain portion of its assets are relatively illiquid. If the Company experiences unexpected withdrawal or surrender activity, it could exhaust its liquid assets and be forced to liquidate other assets, perhaps at a loss or on other unfavorable terms. If the Company is forced to dispose of assets at a loss or on unfavorable terms, it could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, the degree of which would vary in relation to the magnitude of the unexpected surrender or withdrawal activity.

Difficult general economic conditions could materially adversely affect the Company’s business and results of operations.

The Company’s business and results of operations could be materially affected by difficult general economic conditions. Stressed economic conditions and volatility and disruptions in capital markets, particular markets or financial asset classes can have an adverse effect on the Company due to the size of the Company’s investment portfolio and the sensitive nature of insurance liabilities to changing market factors. Disruptions in one market or asset class can also spread to other markets or asset classes.

Volatility in financial markets can also affect the Company’s business by adversely impacting general levels of economic activity, employment and customer behavior.

Like other financial institutions, and particularly life insurers, the Company may be adversely affected by these conditions. The presence of these conditions could have an adverse impact on the Company by, among other things, decreasing demand for its insurance and investment products, and increasing the level of lapses and surrenders of its policies. The Company and its subsidiaries could also experience additional ratings downgrades from ratings agencies, unrealized losses, significant realized losses, impairments in its investment portfolio, and charges incurred as a result of mark-to-market and fair value accounting principles. If general economic conditions become more difficult, the Company’s ability to access sources of capital and liquidity may be limited.

The Company may be required to establish a valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition, and capital position.

Deferred tax assets are attributable to certain differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets represent future savings of taxes which would otherwise be paid in cash. In general, the realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of sufficient future ordinary and capital taxable income. Realization may also be limited for other reasons, including but not limited to changes in tax rules or regulations. If it is determined that a certain deferred tax asset cannot be realized, then a deferred tax valuation allowance is established, with a corresponding charge to either adjusted operating income or other comprehensive income (depending on the nature of the deferred tax asset).

Based on the Company’s current assessment of future taxable income, including available tax planning opportunities, it is more likely than not that the Company will generate sufficient taxable income to realize its material deferred tax assets net of any existing valuation allowance. The Company has recognized valuation allowances of $6.4 million and $5.0 million as of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively, related to certain deferred tax assets which are more likely than not to expire unutilized. These assets are state income tax-related. If future events differ from the Company’s current forecasts, an additional valuation allowance may need to be established, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial condition, or capital position.

The Company could be adversely affected by an inability to access its credit facility.

The Company relies on its credit facility as a potential source of liquidity. The availability of these funds could be critical to the Company’s credit and financial strength ratings and its ability to meet obligations, particularly when alternative sources of credit or liquidity are either difficult to access or costly. The availability of the Company’s credit facility is dependent in part on the ability of the lenders to provide funds under the facility. The Company’s credit facility contains various affirmative and negative covenants and events of default, including covenants requiring the Company to maintain a specified minimum consolidated net worth. The Company’s right to make borrowings under the facility is subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions, including its compliance with all covenants. The Company’s failure to comply with the covenants in the credit facility could restrict its ability to access this credit facility when needed. The Company’s inability to access some or all of the line of credit under the credit facility could lead to downgrades in our credit and financial strength ratings and have a material adverse effect on its liquidity and/or results of operations.

The amount of statutory capital or risk-based capital that the Company has and the amount of statutory capital or risk-based capital that it must hold to maintain its financial strength and credit ratings and meet other requirements can vary significantly from time to time and such amounts are sensitive to a number of factors outside of the Company’s control.

The Company primarily conducts business through licensed insurance company subsidiaries. Insurance regulators have established regulations that provide minimum capitalization requirements based on risk-based capital formulas for life and property and casualty companies. The risk-based capital formula for life insurance companies establishes capital requirements relating to insurance, business, asset, interest rate, and certain other risks. The risk-based capital formula for property and casualty companies establishes capital requirements relating to asset, credit, underwriting, and certain other risks.

In any particular year, statutory surplus amounts and risk-based capital ratios may increase or decrease depending on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the amount of statutory income or losses generated by the Company’s insurance subsidiaries, the amount of additional capital its insurance subsidiaries must hold to support business growth, changes in the Company’s statutory reserve requirements, the Company’s ability to secure capital market solutions to provide statutory reserve relief, changes in equity market levels, the value of certain fixed-income and equity securities in its investment portfolio, the credit ratings of investments held in its portfolio, including those issued by, or explicitly or implicitly guaranteed by, a government, the value of certain derivative instruments, changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates or tax rates, credit market volatility, changes in consumer behavior, and changes to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (the “NAIC”) risk-based capital formulas. Most of these factors are outside of the Company’s control.

At its June 2018 meeting, the NAIC’s Capital Adequacy Task Force adopted a change to the formulas used to calculate risk-based capital to reflect a lower federal corporate income tax rate. The NAIC’s risk-based capital formulas now employ a tax factor of 21%, instead of 35%. This change had a one-time lowering effect on the risk-based capital ratios of the Company and its subsidiaries when it became effective at the end of 2018.

A proposed change to the NAIC’s risk-based capital formula that is currently under consideration would update the factors used to calculate required capital for bonds. While the extent and timing of this proposed change is unknown, if adopted,

it would likely increase the Company’s required capital and decrease the statutory risk-based capital ratios of the Company and its subsidiaries.

The Company’s financial strength and credit ratings are significantly influenced by the statutory surplus amounts and risk-based capital ratios of its insurance company subsidiaries. Rating organizations may implement changes to their internal models that have the effect of increasing or decreasing the amount of statutory capital the Company must hold in order to maintain its current ratings. In addition, rating agencies may downgrade the investments held in the Company’s portfolio, which could result in a reduction of the Company’s capital and surplus and/or its risk-based capital ratio.

    

In scenarios of equity market declines, the amount of additional statutory reserves or risk-based capital the Company is required to hold for its variable product guarantees may increase at a rate greater than the rate of change of the markets. Increases in reserves or risk-based capital could result in a reduction to the Company’s capital, surplus, and/or risk-based capital ratio. Also, in environments where there is not a correlative relationship between interest rates and spreads, the Company’s market value adjusted annuity product can have a material adverse effect on the Company’s statutory surplus position.

A ratings downgrade or other negative action by a rating organization could adversely affect the Company.

Various Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“rating organizations”) review the financial performance and condition of insurers, including the Company’s insurance subsidiaries, and publish their financial strength ratings as indicators of an insurer’s ability to meet policyholder and contract holder obligations. While financial strength ratings are not a recommendation to buy the Company’s securities or products, these ratings are important to maintaining public confidence in the Company, its products, its ability to market its products, and its competitive position. A downgrade or other negative action by a rating organization with respect to the financial strength ratings of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries or the debt ratings of the Company could adversely affect the Company in many ways, including, but not limited to, reducing new sales of insurance and investment products, adversely affecting relationships with distributors and sales agents, increasing the number or amount of policy surrenders and withdrawals of funds, requiring a reduction in prices for the Company’s insurance products and services in order to remain competitive, negatively impacting the Company’s ability to execute its acquisition strategy, and adversely affecting the Company’s ability to obtain reinsurance at a reasonable price, on reasonable terms, or at all. A downgrade of sufficient magnitude could result in the Company, its insurance subsidiaries, or both being required to collateralize reserves, balances, or obligations under certain contractual obligations, including reinsurance, funding, swap, and securitization agreements. A downgrade of sufficient magnitude could also result in the termination of certain funding and swap agreements.

Rating organizations also publish credit ratings for issuers of debt securities, including the Company. Credit ratings are indicators of a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner. These ratings are important to the Company’s overall ability to access credit markets and other types of liquidity. Credit ratings are not recommendations to buy the Company’s securities or products. Downgrades of the Company’s credit ratings, or an announced potential downgrade or other negative action, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial conditions and results of operations in many ways, including, but not limited to, limiting the Company’s access to capital markets, increasing the cost of debt, impairing its ability to raise capital to refinance maturing debt obligations, limiting its capacity to support the growth of its insurance subsidiaries, requiring it to pay higher amounts in connection with certain existing or future financing arrangements or transactions, and making it more difficult to maintain or improve the current financial strength ratings of its insurance subsidiaries. A downgrade of sufficient magnitude, in combination with other factors, could require the Company to post collateral pursuant to certain contractual obligations.

Rating organizations assign ratings based upon several factors. While most of the factors relate to the rated company, some of the factors relate to the views of the rating organization, general economic conditions, ratings of parent companies, and other circumstances outside the rated company’s control. Factors identified by rating agencies that could lead to negative rating actions with respect to the Company or its insurance subsidiaries include, but are not limited to, weak growth in earnings, a deterioration of earnings (including deterioration due to spread compression in interest-sensitive lines of business), significant impairments in investment portfolios, heightened financial leverage, lower interest coverage ratios, risk-based capital ratios falling below ratings thresholds, a material reinsurance loss, underperformance of an acquisition, and the rating of a parent company. In addition, rating organizations use various models and formulas to assess the strength of a rated company, and from time to time rating organizations have, in their discretion, altered the models. Changes to the models could impact the rating organizations’ judgment of the rating to be assigned to the rated company. Rating organizations may take various actions, positive or negative, with respect to our debt ratings and financial strength ratings of our insurance subsidiaries, including as a result of our status as a subsidiary of Dai-ichi Life. Any negative action by a rating organization could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations. The Company cannot predict what actions the rating organizations may take, or what actions the Company may take in response to the actions of the rating organizations.

The Company operates as a holding company and depends on the ability of its subsidiaries to transfer funds to it to meet its obligations.

The Company operates as a holding company for its insurance and other subsidiaries and does not have any significant operations of its own. The Company’s primary sources of funding are dividends from its operating subsidiaries, revenues from investment, data processing, legal, and management services rendered to subsidiaries, investment income, and external financing. These funding sources support the Company’s general corporate needs including its debt service. If the funding the Company receives from its subsidiaries is insufficient for it to fund its debt service and other holding company obligations, it may be required to raise funds through the incurrence of debt, or the sale of assets.

The states in which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled impose certain restrictions on the subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends and make other payments to the Company. State insurance regulators may prohibit the payment of dividends or other payments to the Company by its insurance subsidiaries if they determine that the payments could be adverse to the insurance subsidiary or its policyholders or contract holders. In addition, the amount of surplus that our insurance subsidiaries could pay as dividends is constrained by the amount of surplus they hold to maintain their financial strength ratings, to provide an additional layer of margin for risk protection and for future investment in our businesses.

The Company could be adversely affected by an inability to access FHLB lending.

Certain subsidiaries of the Company are members of the Federal Home Loan Bank (the “FHLB”) of Cincinnati and the FHLB of New York. Membership provides these Company subsidiaries with access to FHLB financial services, including advances that provide an attractive funding source for short-term borrowing and for the sale of funding agreements. The extent to which membership or the FHLB services are available could be impacted by legislative or regulatory action at the state or federal level. Any developments that limit access to FHLB financial services could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

In addition, the ability of the Company’s subsidiaries to access liquidity from the FHLB is impacted by other factors that are dependent on market conditions or policies established by the FHLB. Fluctuations in the market value of collateral can adversely impact available borrowing capacity. Changes in collateral haircuts established by the FHLB and what is deemed to be eligible collateral by the FHLB can also impact the amount and availability of funding.

The Company’s securities lending program may subject it to liquidity and other risks.

The Company maintains a securities lending program in which securities are loaned to third parties, including brokerage firms and commercial banks. The borrowers of the Company’s securities provide the Company with collateral, typically in cash, which it separately maintains. The Company invests the collateral in other securities, including primarily short-term government repo and money market funds. Securities loaned under the program may be returned to the Company by the borrower at any time, requiring the Company to return the related cash collateral. In some cases, the Company may use the cash collateral provided to purchase other securities to be held as invested collateral, and the maturity of such securities may exceed the term of the securities loaned under the program and/or the market value of such securities may fall below the amount of cash collateral that the Company is obligated to return to the borrower of the Company’s loaned securities. If the Company is required to return significant amounts of cash collateral on short notice and is forced to sell the securities held as invested collateral to meet the obligation, the Company may have difficulty selling such securities in a timely manner and/or the Company may be forced to sell the securities in a volatile or illiquid market for less than it otherwise would have been able to realize under normal market conditions. In addition, the Company’s ability to sell securities held as invested collateral may be restricted under stressful market and economic conditions in which liquidity deteriorates.

The Company’s financial condition or results of operations could be adversely impacted if the Company’s assumptions regarding the fair value and future performance of its investments differ from actual experience.

The Company makes assumptions regarding the fair value and expected future performance of its investments. Expectations that the Company’s investments in mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities will continue to perform in accordance with their contractual terms are based on assumptions a market participant would use in determining the current fair value and consider the performance of the underlying assets. It is reasonably possible that the underlying collateral of these investments will perform worse than current market expectations and that such reduced performance may lead to adverse changes in the cash flows on the Company’s holdings of these types of securities. In addition, expectations that the Company’s investments in corporate securities and/or debt obligations will continue to perform in accordance with their contractual terms are based on evidence gathered through its normal credit surveillance process. It is possible that issuers of the Company’s investments in corporate securities and/or debt obligations will perform worse than current expectations. The occurrence of any of the foregoing events could lead the Company to recognize write-downs within its portfolio of mortgage and asset-backed securities or its portfolio of corporate securities and/or debt obligations. It is also possible that such unanticipated events would lead the Company to dispose of such investments and recognize the effects of any market movements in its financial statements. The Company also makes certain assumptions when utilizing internal models to value certain of its investments. It is possible that actual results will differ from the Company’s assumptions. Such events could result in a material change in the value of the Company’s investments.

Adverse actions of certain funds or their advisers could have a detrimental impact on the Company’s ability to sell its variable life and annuity products, or maintain current levels of assets in those products.

Certain of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries have arrangements with various open-end investment companies, or “mutual funds”, and the investment advisers to those mutual funds, to offer the mutual funds as investment options in the Company’s variable life and annuity products. It is possible that the termination of one or more of those arrangements by a mutual fund or its adviser could have a detrimental impact on the company’s ability to sell its variable life and annuity products, or maintain current levels of assets in those products, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations.

Industry and Regulatory Related Risks

The business of the Company is highly regulated and is subject to routine audits, examinations, and actions by regulators, law enforcement agencies, and self-regulatory organizations.

The Company is subject to regulation by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and each of the states in which it conducts business. ProEquities, the Company’s broker dealer, is subject to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). In many instances, the regulatory models emanate from the NAIC and, at the state level, from the North American Securities Administrators Association. Such regulation is vested in state agencies having broad administrative and, in some instances, discretionary power dealing with many aspects of the Company’s business, which may include, among other things, premium and cost of insurance rates and increases thereto, interest crediting policy, underwriting practices, reserve requirements, marketing practices, advertising, privacy, cybersecurity, policy forms, reinsurance reserve requirements, insurer use of captive reinsurance companies, acquisitions, mergers, capital adequacy, claims practices, and the remittance of unclaimed property. In addition, some state insurance departments may enact rules or regulations with extra-territorial application, effectively extending their jurisdiction to areas such as permitted insurance company investments that are normally the province of an insurance company’s domiciliary state regulator.

At any given time, a number of financial, market conduct, or other examinations or audits of the Company’s subsidiaries may be ongoing. It is possible that any examination or audit may result in payments of fines and penalties, payments to customers, or both, as well as changes in systems or procedures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations. The Company’s insurance subsidiaries are required to obtain state regulatory approval for rate increases for certain health insurance products. The Company’s profits may be adversely affected if the requested rate increases are not approved in full by regulators in a timely fashion.

State insurance regulators and the NAIC regularly re-examine existing laws and regulations applicable to insurance companies and their products. Changes in these laws and regulations, or in interpretations thereof, are often made for the benefit of the consumer and may lead to additional expense for the insurer and, thus, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

At the federal level, the executive branch or federal agencies may issue orders or take other action with respect to financial services and life insurance matters, and bills are routinely introduced in both chambers of the United States Congress that could affect the Company and its business. In the past, Congress has considered legislation that would impact insurance companies in numerous ways, such as providing for an optional federal charter or a federal presence for insurance, preempting state law in certain respects regarding the regulation of reinsurance, increasing federal oversight in areas such as consumer protection and solvency regulation, setting tax rates, and other matters. The Company cannot predict whether or in what form legislation will be enacted and, if so, whether the enacted legislation will positively or negatively affect the Company or whether any effects will be material. In addition, our broker-dealer subsidiary and our variable annuities and variable life insurance products are subject to regulation and supervision by the SEC and FINRA. These laws and regulations generally grant supervisory agencies and self-regulatory organizations broad administrative powers, including the power to limit or restrict the broker-dealer subsidiary from carrying on its businesses in the event that it fails to comply with such laws and regulations. The foregoing regulatory or governmental bodies, as well as the DOL and others, have the authority to review our products and business practices and those of our agents, registered representatives, associated persons, and employees. In recent years, there has been increased scrutiny of the insurance industry by these bodies, which has included more extensive examinations, regular sweep inquiries, and more detailed review of disclosure documents.  These regulatory or governmental bodies may bring regulatory or other legal actions against us if, in their view, our practices, or those of our agents or employees, are improper. These actions can result in substantial fines, penalties, or prohibitions or restrictions on our business activities and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition.

The Company may be subject to regulations of, or regulations influenced by, international regulatory authorities or initiatives.

The NAIC and the Company’s state regulators may be influenced by the initiatives of international regulatory bodies, and those initiatives may not translate readily into the legal system under which U.S. insurers must operate. There is increasing pressure to conform to international standards due to the globalization of the business of insurance and the most recent financial crisis. In addition to developments at the NAIC and in the United States, the Financial Stability Board (“FSB”), consisting of representatives of national financial authorities of the G20 nations, and the G20 have issued a series of proposals intended to produce significant changes in how financial companies, particularly companies that are members of large and complex financial groups, should be regulated.

The International Association of Insurance Supervisors (“IAIS”), at the direction of the FSB, has published an evolving method for identifying “global systemically important insurers” (“G-SIIs”) and high-level policy measures that will apply to G-SIIs. The FSB, working with national authorities and the IAIS, has designated nine insurance groups as G-SIIs. The IAIS is developing the policy measures which include higher capital requirements and enhanced supervision. Although neither the Company nor Dai-ichi Life has been designated as a G-SII, the list of designated insurers may be updated periodically by the FSB. It is possible that due to the size and reach of the combined Dai-ichi Life group, or a change in the method of identifying G-SIIs, the combined group, including the Company, could be designated as a G-SII.

The IAIS is also in the process of developing a common framework for the supervision of internationally active insurance groups (“IAIGs”). The framework, which is currently under discussion, may include a global capital measurement standard for insurance groups deemed to be IAIGs that could exceed the sum of state or other local capital requirements. In addition, the IAIS is developing a model framework for the supervision of IAIGs that contemplates “group wide supervision” across national

boundaries and legal entities, which could require each IAIG to conduct its own risk and solvency assessment to monitor and manage its overall solvency. The IAIS has also published a framework for assessing and mitigating global systemic risk. The framework proposes enhanced supervisory and corrective measures and disclosures for any build-up of systemic risk in liquidity risk, macroeconomic exposure, counterparty exposure and substitutability. It is likely that the combined Dai-ichi Life group will be deemed an IAIG, in which case it, and the Company, may be subject to supervision requirements, capital measurement standards, and enhanced disclosures beyond those applicable to any competitors who are not designated as an IAIG.

The Company’s sole stockholder, Dai-ichi Life, is also subject to regulation by the Japanese Financial Services Authority (“JFSA”). Under applicable laws and regulations, Dai-ichi Life is required to provide notice to or obtain the consent of the JFSA prior to taking certain actions or engaging in certain transactions, either directly or indirectly through its subsidiaries, including the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries, which could limit the ability of the Company to engage in certain transactions or business initiatives.

While it is not yet known how or the extent to which the Company will be impacted by these regulations, the Company may experience increased costs of compliance, increased disclosure, less flexibility in capital management, and more burdensome regulation and capital requirements for specific lines of business. In addition, such regulations could impact the business of the Company and its reserve and capital requirements, financial condition or results of operations.

NAIC actions, pronouncements and initiatives may affect the Company’s product profitability, reserve and capital requirements, financial condition, or results of operations.

Although some NAIC pronouncements, particularly as they affect accounting, reserving and risk-based capital issues, may take effect automatically without affirmative action taken by the states, the NAIC is not a governmental entity and its processes and procedures do not comport with those to which governmental entities typically adhere. Therefore, it is possible that actions could be taken by the NAIC that become effective without the procedural safeguards that would be present if governmental action was required. In addition, with respect to some financial regulations and guidelines, states sometimes defer to the interpretation of the insurance department of a non-domiciliary state. Neither the action of the non-domiciliary state nor the action of the NAIC is binding on a domiciliary state. Accordingly, a state could choose to follow a different interpretation. The Company is also subject to the risk that compliance with any particular regulator’s interpretation of a legal, accounting, or actuarial issue may result in non-compliance with another regulator’s interpretation of the same issue, particularly when compliance is judged in hindsight. There is an additional risk that any particular regulator’s interpretation of a legal, accounting or actuarial issue may change over time to the Company’s detriment, or that changes to the overall legal or market environment may cause the Company to change its practices in ways that may, in some cases, limit its growth or profitability. Statutes, regulations, interpretations, and instructions may be applied with retroactive impact, particularly in areas such as accounting, reserve and risk-based capital requirements. Also, regulatory actions with prospective impact can potentially have a significant impact on currently sold products.

The NAIC has announced more focused inquiries on certain matters that could have an impact on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Such inquiries concern, for example, insurer use of captive reinsurance companies, variable annuity reserves and capital treatment, certain aspects of insurance holding company reporting and disclosure, reinsurance, cybersecurity practices, liquidity assessment, and risk-based capital calculations. In addition, the NAIC continues to consider various initiatives to change and modernize its financial and solvency requirements and regulations. It has adopted principles-based reserving methodologies for life insurance and annuity reserves, but additional formulas and/or guidance relevant to the new standard are being developed. The NAIC is also considering changes to accounting and risk-based capital regulations, risk-based capital calculations, governance practices of insurers, and other items. Additionally, the NAIC is studying a group capital calculation that would measure capital across U.S.-based insurance groups. The Company cannot currently estimate what impact these more focused inquiries or proposed changes, if they occur, will have on its product mix, product profitability, reserve and capital requirements, financial condition, or results of operations.

The Company’s use of captive reinsurance companies to finance statutory reserves related to its term and universal life products and to reduce volatility affecting its variable annuity products may be limited or adversely affected by regulatory action, pronouncements and interpretations.

The Company currently uses affiliated captive reinsurance companies in various structures to finance certain statutory reserves based on a regulation entitled “Valuation of Life Insurance Policies Model Regulation,” commonly known as “Regulation XXX,” and a supporting guideline entitled “The Application of the Valuation of Life Insurance Policies Model Regulation,” commonly known as “Guideline AXXX,” which are associated with term life insurance and universal life insurance with secondary guarantees, respectively, as well as to reduce the volatility in statutory risk-based capital associated with certain guaranteed minimum withdrawal and death benefit riders associated with certain of the Company’s variable annuity products.

The NAIC has adopted Actuarial Guideline XLVIII (“AG48”) and the substantially similar “Term and Universal Life Insurance Reserve Financing Model Regulation” (the “Reserve Model”) which establish national standards for new reserve financing arrangements for term life insurance and universal life insurance with secondary guarantees. AG48 and the Reserve Model govern collateral requirements for captive reinsurance arrangements. In order to obtain reserve credit, AG48 and the Reserve Model require a minimum level of funds, consisting of primary and other securities, to be held by or on behalf of ceding insurers as security under each captive life reinsurance treaty. As a result of AG48 and the Reserve Model, the implementation of new captive structures in the future may be less capital efficient, lead to lower product returns and/or increased product pricing, or result in reduced sales of certain products. In some circumstances, AG48 and the Reserve Model could impact the Company’s ability to engage in certain reinsurance transactions with non-affiliates.

The Financial Condition (E) Committee of the NAIC has adopted a framework for changes to current rules and regulations applicable to the determination of variable annuity reserves and risk-based capital. The changes are intended to decrease incentives for insurers to establish variable annuities captives and will apply to both in-force and new business. The new rules and regulations will likely have a 2020 effective date and an optional 3- to 7-year transition period from current rules and regulations, beginning on the effective date. The changes could adversely affect our future financial condition and results of operations.

The NAIC adopted revisions to the Part A Laws and Regulations Preamble (the “Preamble”) of the NAIC Financial Regulation Standards and Accreditation Program that includes within the definition of “multi-state insurer” certain insurer-owned captives and special purpose vehicles that are single-state licensed but assume reinsurance from cedants operating in multiple states. The revised definition subjects certain captives, including XXX/AXXX captives, variable annuity and long-term care captives, to all of the accreditation standards applicable to other traditional multi-state insurers, including standards related to capital and surplus requirements, risk-based capital requirements, investment laws, and credit for reinsurance laws. Although we do not expect the revised definition to affect our existing life insurance captives (or our ability to engage in life insurance captive transactions in the future), such application will likely prevent us from engaging in variable annuity captive transactions on the same or a similar basis as in the past and, if applied retroactively, would likely cause us to recapture business from and unwind our existing variable annuity captive (“VA Captive”).

While the recapture of business from our existing VA Captive, caused either by actions of the VAIWG or the effect of the Preamble, would not have a material adverse effect on the Company given current market conditions, in the future the Company could experience fluctuations in its risk-based capital ratio due to market volatility if it were prohibited from engaging in similar transactions or required to unwind its existing VA Captive, which could adversely affect our future financial condition and results of operations.

Any regulatory action or change in interpretation that materially adversely affects the Company’s use or materially increases the Company’s cost of using captives or reinsurers for the affected business, either retroactively or prospectively, could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations. If the Company were required to discontinue its use of captives for intercompany reinsurance transactions on a retroactive basis, adverse impacts would include early termination fees payable to third party finance providers with respect to certain structures, diminished capital position, and higher cost of capital. Additionally, finding alternative means to support policy liabilities efficiently is an unknown factor that would be dependent, in part, on future market conditions and the Company’s ability to obtain required regulatory approvals. On a prospective basis, discontinuation of the use of captives could impact the types, amounts and pricing of products offered by the Company’s insurance subsidiaries.

Laws, regulations, and initiatives related to unreported deaths and unclaimed property and death benefits may result in operational burdens, fines, unexpected payments, or escheatments.

Since 2012, various states have enacted laws that require life insurers to search for unreported deaths. The National Conference of Insurance Legislators (“NCOIL”) has adopted the Model Unclaimed Life Insurance Benefits Act (the “Unclaimed Benefits Act”) and legislation or regulations have been enacted in numerous states that are similar to the Unclaimed Benefits Act, although each state’s version differs in some respects. The Unclaimed Benefits Act, if adopted by any state, imposes requirements on insurers to periodically compare their life insurance and annuity contracts and retained asset accounts against the U.S. Social Security Administration’s Death Master File or similar databases (a “Death Database”), investigate any potential matches to confirm the death and determine whether benefits are due, and to attempt to locate the beneficiaries of any benefits that are due or, if no beneficiary can be located, escheat the benefit to the state as unclaimed property. Other states in which the Company does business may also consider adopting legislation similar to the Unclaimed Benefits Act. The Company cannot predict whether such legislation will be proposed or enacted in additional states.

The Uniform Laws Commission has adopted revisions to the Uniform Unclaimed Property Act in a manner likely to impact state unclaimed property laws and requirements, though it is not clear at this time to what extent or whether requirements will conflict with otherwise imposed search requirements. Other life insurance industry associations and regulatory associations are also considering these matters. Certain states have amended or may amend their unclaimed property laws in a manner which creates additional obligations for life insurance companies. The enactment or amendment of such unclaimed property laws may require the Company to incur significant expenses, including benefits with respect to terminated policies for which no reserves are currently held and unanticipated operational expenses. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

A number of state treasury departments and administrators of unclaimed property have audited life insurance companies for compliance with unclaimed property laws, and state insurance regulators have initiated targeted multi-state examinations of life insurance companies with respect to the companies’ claims paying practices and use of a Death Database to identify unreported deaths in their life insurance policies, annuity contracts, and retained asset accounts. There is no clear basis in previously existing law for treating an unreported death as giving rise to a policy benefit that would be subject to unclaimed property procedures. However, a number of life insurers have entered into resolution agreements with state treasury departments and administrators of unclaimed property or settlement or consent agreements with state insurance regulators. The amounts publicly reported to have been paid to beneficiaries, escheated to the states, and/or paid as administrative and/or examination fees to the insurance regulators in connection with the settlement or consent agreements have been substantial.

Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries as well as certain other insurance companies from whom the Company has coinsured blocks of life insurance and annuity policies are subject to unclaimed property audits and/or targeted multi-state examinations by insurance regulators similar to those described above. It is possible that the audits, examinations, and/or the enactment of state laws similar to the Unclaimed Benefits Act could result in additional payments to beneficiaries, additional escheatment of funds

deemed abandoned under state laws, payment of administrative penalties and/or examination fees to state authorities, and changes to the Company’s procedures for identifying unreported deaths and escheatment of abandoned property. It is possible any such additional payments and any costs related to changes in Company procedures could materially impact the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations. It is also possible that life insurers, including the Company, may be subject to claims, regulatory actions, law enforcement actions, and civil litigation arising from their prior business practices, unclaimed property practices, or related audits and examinations. Any resulting liabilities, payments, or costs, including initial and ongoing costs of changes to the Company’s procedures or systems, could be significant and could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations.

The Company has previously been subject to litigation regarding compliance with the West Virginia Uniform Unclaimed Property Act, but the Company does not believe that losses arising from the litigation will be material. The Company cannot, however, predict whether other jurisdictions will pursue similar actions or if they do, whether such actions will have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition and/or results of operations.

The Company is subject to insurance guaranty fund laws, rules and regulations that could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

Under insurance guaranty fund laws in most states, insurance companies doing business therein can be assessed up to prescribed limits for policyholder losses incurred by insolvent companies. From time to time, companies may be asked to contribute amounts beyond prescribed limits. It is possible that the Company could be assessed with respect to product lines not offered by the Company. In 2017, the NAIC adopted revisions to the Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association Model Act that, if adopted by states, would result in an increase to the percentage of liabilities attributable to any future long term care provider insolvency that can be assessed to life insurers. Legislation may be introduced in various states with respect to guaranty fund assessment laws related to insurance products, including long term care insurance and other specialty products, that differs from the revised Model Act and which increases the cost of future assessments and/or alters future premium tax offsets received in connection with guaranty fund assessments. The Company cannot predict the amount, nature or timing of any future assessments or legislation, any of which could have a material and adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

The Company is subject to insurable interest laws, rules, and regulations that could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

The purchase of life insurance products is limited by state insurable interest laws, which in most jurisdictions require that the purchaser of life insurance name a beneficiary that has some interest in the sustained life of the insured. To some extent, the insurable interest laws present a barrier to the life settlement, or “stranger-owned” industry, in which a financial entity acquires an interest in life insurance proceeds, and efforts have been made in some states to liberalize the insurable interest laws. To the extent these laws are relaxed, the Company’s lapse assumptions may prove to be incorrect, which could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

The Healthcare Act and related regulations could adversely affect the results of operations or financial condition of the Company.

The Company is subject to various conditions and requirements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (the “Healthcare Act”). The Healthcare Act makes significant changes to the regulation of health insurance and may affect the Company in various ways. The Healthcare Act may affect the small blocks of business the Company has offered or acquired over the years that are, or are deemed to constitute, health insurance. The Healthcare Act may also affect the benefit plans the Company sponsors for employees or retirees and their dependents, the Company’s expense to provide such benefits, the tax liabilities of the Company in connection with the provision of such benefits, and the Company’s ability to attract or retain employees. In addition, the Company may be subject to regulations, guidance or determinations emanating from the various regulatory authorities authorized under the Healthcare Act. The Company cannot predict the effect that the Healthcare Act, any amendments or modifications to the Healthcare Act, or any regulatory pronouncement made under the Healthcare Act, will have on its results of operations or financial condition.

Laws, rules, and regulations promulgated in connection with the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act may adversely affect the results of operations or financial condition of the Company.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) enacted in July 2010 made sweeping changes to the regulation of financial services entities, products and markets. Although the new presidential administration has indicated a desire to revise or reverse some of its provisions, the fate of these proposals is unclear, and we cannot predict with certainty how the Dodd-Frank Act will continue to affect the financial markets generally, or impact our business, ratings, results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act imposed a comprehensive new regulatory regime on the over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives marketplace and granted new joint regulatory authority to the SEC and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) over OTC derivatives. While the SEC and CFTC continue to promulgate rules required by the Dodd-Frank Act, most rules have been finalized and, as a result, certain of the Company’s derivatives operations are subject to, among other things, new recordkeeping, reporting and documentation requirements and new clearing requirements for certain swap transactions (currently, certain interest rate swaps and index-based credit default swaps; cleared swaps require the posting of margin to a clearinghouse via a futures commission merchant and, in some case, to the futures commission merchant as well).

In 2015, U.S. federal banking regulators and the CFTC adopted regulations that will require swap dealers, security-based swap dealers, major swap participants, and major security-based swap participants (“Swap Entities”) to post margin to, and collect

margin from, their OTC swap counterparties (the “Margin Rules”). Under the Margin Rules, the Company would be considered a “financial end-user” that, when facing a Swap Entity, is required to post and collect variation margin for its non-cleared swaps. In addition, depending on its derivatives exposure, the Company may be required to post and collect initial margin as well. The initial margin requirements of the Margin Rules will be phased-in over a period of five years based on the average aggregate notional amount of the Swap Entity’s (combined with all of its affiliates) and its counterparty’s (combined with all of its affiliates) swap positions. It is anticipated that the Company will not be subject to the initial margin requirements until September 1, 2020. The variation margin requirement took effect on September 1, 2016, for swaps where both the Swap Entity (and its affiliates) and its counterparty (and its affiliates) have an average daily aggregate notional amount of swaps for March, April, and May of 2016 that exceeds $3 trillion. Otherwise, the variation margin requirement, to which we are subject, took effect on March 1, 2017.

Other regulatory requirements may indirectly impact us. For example, non-U.S. counterparties of the Company may also be subject to non-U.S. regulation of their derivatives transactions with the Company. In addition, counterparties regulated by the Prudential Regulators (which consist of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Farm Credit Administration, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency) are subject to liquidity, leverage, and capital requirements that impact their derivatives transactions with the Company. Collectively, these new requirements have increased the direct and indirect costs of our derivatives activities and may further increase them in the future.

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, in December 2013, the Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) issued a report on how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the United States and, in December 2014, the FIO published its report on the breadth and scope of the global reinsurance market. In this reinsurance report, the FIO indicates that reinsurance collateral continues to be at the forefront of its thinking with regard to potential direct federal involvement in insurance regulation. Specifically, the FIO’s reinsurance report argues that federal officials are well-positioned to make determinations regarding whether a foreign jurisdiction has sufficiently effective regulation and, in doing so, consider other prudential issues pending in the U.S. and between the U.S. and affected foreign jurisdictions. The reinsurance report notes that work continues towards initiating negotiations for covered agreements with leading reinsurance jurisdictions that may have the effect of preempting inconsistent state laws. In 2017, the U.S. and E.U. entered into such a covered agreement. It remains to be seen whether the U.S. will negotiate covered agreements with other major U.S. trading partners. More generally, it remains to be seen whether either of the FIO’s reports will affect the manner in which insurance and reinsurance are regulated in the U.S. and therefore affect the Company’s business.

The Dodd-Frank Act also established the Financial Stability Oversight Council (the “FSOC”), which is authorized to determine whether an insurance company is systematically significant and to recommend that it should be subject to enhanced prudential standards and to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. In April 2012, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (the “FSOC”) approved its final rule for designating non-bank financial companies as systemically important financial institutions (“SIFI”). Under the final rule, the Company’s assets, liabilities, and operations do not currently satisfy the financial thresholds that serve as the first step of the three-stage process to designate a non-bank financial company as a SIFI. While recent developments suggest that it is unlikely that FSOC will be designating additional non-bank financial companies as systematically significant, there can be no assurance of that unless and until FSOC’s authority to do so has been rescinded.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) has supervisory authority over certain non-banks whose activities or products it determines pose risks to consumers, and issued a rule in 2016 amending regulations under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act that requires the Company to, among other things, collect and disclose extensive data related to its lending practices. At this time, the rule relates to reporting data relative to Company loans made on multi-family apartments, seniors living housing, manufactured housing communities, and any mixed-use properties which contain a residential component. It is unclear at this time how burdensome compliance with this or other rules promulgated under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act will become.

Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries sell products that may be regulated by the CFPB. The CFPB continues to bring enforcement actions involving a growing number of issues, including actions brought jointly with state Attorneys General, which could directly or indirectly affect the Company or any of its subsidiaries. The Company is unable at this time to predict the impact of these activities on the Company.

Although the full impact of the Dodd-Frank Act cannot be determined until all of the various studies mandated by the law are conducted and all implementing regulations are adopted, many of the legislation’s requirements could have an adverse impact on the financial services and insurance industries. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act could make it more expensive for us to conduct business, require us to make changes to our business model or satisfy increased capital requirements.

New and amended regulations regarding the standard of care or standard of conduct applicable to investment professionals, insurance agencies, and financial institutions that recommend or sell annuities or life insurance products may have a material adverse impact on our ability to sell annuities and other products and to retain in-force business and on our financial condition or results of operations.

Sales of life insurance policies and annuity contracts offered by the Company are subject to regulations relating to sales practices adopted by a variety of federal and state regulatory authorities. Certain annuities and life insurance policies such as variable annuities and variable universal life insurance are regulated under the federal securities laws administered by the SEC. On April 18, 2018, the SEC voted to propose rulemakings and interpretations relating to the standard of conduct applicable to broker-dealers, investment advisers, and their representatives when making certain recommendations to retail customers. Specifically, under the proposed regulations, a broker-dealer would be required to act in the best interest of a retail customer when recommending any securities transaction or investment strategy involving securities to a retail customer. The SEC also proposed an interpretation reaffirming and, in some cases, clarifying its views of the fiduciary duty that investment advisers owe to their

clients. Another SEC proposal would require broker-dealers and investment advisers to provide each customer with a summary of the nature of the customer’s relationship with the investment professional, as well as a restriction on the use of the terms “adviser” and “advisor” by broker-dealers. The comment period on the proposals closed on August 7, 2018. The SEC has indicated that it will issue a final version of the regulations and the interpretation before the end of the third quarter 2019.

In addition, broker-dealers, insurance agencies and other financial institutions sell the Company’s annuities to employee benefit plans governed by provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”) that are governed by similar provisions under the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). Consequently, our activities and those of the firms that sell the Company’s products are subject to restrictions that require ERISA fiduciaries to perform their duties solely in the interests of ERISA plan participants and beneficiaries, and that prohibit ERISA fiduciaries from causing a covered plan or retirement account to engage in certain prohibited transactions absent an exemption.

The NAIC is considering revisions to the Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation which, if adopted by regulators, could impose a stricter standard of care upon insurers who sell annuities. Likewise, several states are considering or have adopted legislation or regulatory measures that would implement new requirements and standards applicable to the sale of annuities and, in some cases, life insurance products. The NAIC and several states, including Connecticut, Nevada, New Jersey, and New York have passed laws or proposed regulations requiring insurers, investment advisers, broker-dealers, and/or agents to disclose conflicts of interest to clients or to meet standards that their advice be in the customer’s best interest. These standards vary widely in scope, applicability, and timing of implementation. The adoption and enactment of these or any revised standards as law or regulation could have a material adverse effect upon the manner in which the Company’s products are sold and impact the overall market for such products.

There remains significant uncertainty surrounding the final form that these regulations may take. Our current distributors may continue to move forward with their plans to limit the number of products they offer, including the types of products offered by the Company. The Company may find it necessary to change sales representative and/or broker compensation, to limit the assistance or advice it can provide to owners of the Company’s annuities, to replace or engage additional distributors, or otherwise change the manner in which it designs, supervises, and supports sales of its annuities and, where applicable, life insurance products. In addition, the Company continues to incur expenses in connection with initial and ongoing compliance obligations with respect to such rules, and in the aggregate these expenses may be significant. Any of the foregoing regulatory, legislative, or judicial measures or the reaction to such activity by consumers or other members of the insurance industry could have a material adverse impact on our ability to sell annuities and other products, to retain in-force business, and on our financial condition or results of operations.

The Company may be subject to regulation, investigations, enforcement actions, fines and penalties imposed by the SEC, FINRA and other federal and international regulators in connection with its business operations .

Certain life insurance policies, contracts, and annuities offered by the Company are subject to regulation under the federal securities laws administered by the SEC. The federal securities laws contain regulatory restrictions and criminal, administrative, and private remedial provisions. From time to time, the SEC and the FINRA examine or investigate the activities of broker-dealers, insurer’s separate accounts and investment advisors, including the Company’s affiliated broker-dealers and investment advisers. These examinations or investigations often focus on the activities of the registered representatives and registered investment advisers doing business through such entities and the entities’ supervision of those persons. It is possible that any examination or investigation could lead to enforcement action by the regulator and/or may result in payments of fines and penalties, payments to customers, or both, as well as changes in systems or procedures of such entities, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

The Company may also be subject to regulation by governments of the countries in which it currently does, or may in the future, do, business, as well as regulation by the U.S. Government with respect to its operations in foreign countries, such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Penalties for violating the various laws governing the Company’s business in other countries may include restrictions upon business operations, fines and imprisonment, both within the U.S. and abroad. U.S. enforcement of anti-corruption laws continues to increase in magnitude, and penalties may be substantial.

The Company is subject to conditions and requirements set forth in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), which places restrictions on the use of automated telephone and facsimile machines. Class action lawsuits alleging violations of the act have been filed against a number of companies, including life insurance carriers. These class action lawsuits contain allegations that defendant carriers were vicariously liable for the alleged wrongful conduct of agents who violated the TCPA. Some of the class actions have resulted in substantial settlements against other insurers. Any such actions against the Company could result in a material adverse effect upon our financial condition or results of operations.

Other types of regulation that could affect the Company and its subsidiaries include, but are not limited to, insurance company investment laws and regulations, state statutory accounting and reserving practices, antitrust laws, minimum solvency requirements, enterprise risk requirements, state securities laws, federal privacy laws, cybersecurity regulation, technology and data regulations, insurable interest laws, federal anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism laws, employment and immigration laws (including laws in Alabama where over half of the Company’s employees are located), and because the Company owns and operates real property, state, federal, and local environmental laws. Under some circumstances, severe penalties may be imposed for breach of these laws.

The Company cannot predict what form any future changes to laws and/or regulations affecting participants in the financial services sector and/or insurance industry, including the Company and its competitors or those entities with which it does business, may take, or what effect, if any, such changes may have.

The Company’s ability to enter into certain transactions is influenced by how such a transaction might affect Dai-ichi Life’s taxation in Japan.

Changes to tax law, or interpretations of existing tax law could adversely affect the Company and its ability to compete with non-insurance products or reduce the demand for certain insurance products.

In general, existing law exempts policyholders from current taxation on the increase in value of most insurance and annuity products during these products’ accumulation phase. This favorable tax treatment provides some of the Company’s products with a competitive advantage over products offered by non-insurance companies. To the extent that the law is revised to either reduce the tax favored status of life insurance and annuity products, or to establish the tax favored status of competing products, then all life insurance companies, including the Company’s subsidiaries, would be adversely affected with respect to their ability to sell their products. Furthermore, such changes would generally cause increased surrenders of existing life insurance and annuity products. For example, a change in law that further restricts the deductibility of interest expense when a business owns a life insurance product would result in increased surrenders of these products.

The Company is subject to corporate income, excise, franchise, and premium taxes. Federal tax law provides certain benefits to the Company, such as the dividends-received deduction, the deferral of current taxation on derivatives’ and securities’ economic income and the current deduction for future policy benefits and claims. The Tax Cut and Jobs Act (the “Tax Reform Act”), enacted in December 2017, requires the Company to report higher amounts of taxable income both currently and in the future. However, it also significantly reduced the corporate income tax rate. Overall, the Company expects to pay less income tax in the future under the Tax Reform Act.

The Company’s mid-2005 transition from relying on reinsurance for newly-written traditional life products to reinsuring some of these products’ reserves into its captive insurance companies resulted in a net reduction in its current taxes, offset by an increase in its deferred taxes. The resulting benefit of reduced current taxes is attributed to the applicable life products and is an important component of the profitability of these products. The Tax Reform Act, with its overall lower tax rate, has decreased the economic tax benefit associated with these products. Ultimately, the profitability and competitive position of these products is dependent on the Company’s ability to continue deducting its provision for future policy benefits and claims and the Company’s ability to generate taxable income.

Financial services companies are frequently the targets of legal proceedings, including class action litigation, which could result in substantial judgments.

A number of judgments have been returned against insurers, broker-dealers, and other providers of financial services involving, among other things, sales, underwriting practices, product design, product disclosure, product administration, denial or delay of benefits, charging excessive or impermissible fees, recommending unsuitable products to customers, breaching fiduciary or other duties to customers, refund or claims practices, alleged agent misconduct, failure to properly supervise representatives, relationships with agents or other persons with whom the company does business, employment-related matters, payment of sales or other contingent commissions, and other matters. Often these legal proceedings have resulted in the award of substantial judgments that are disproportionate to the actual damages, including material amounts of punitive non-economic compensatory damages. In some states, juries, judges, and arbitrators have substantial discretion in awarding punitive and non-economic compensatory damages, which creates the potential for unpredictable material adverse judgments or awards in any given legal proceeding. Arbitration awards are subject to very limited appellate review. In addition, in some legal proceedings, companies have made material settlement payments. In some instances, substantial judgments may be the result of a party’s perceived ability to satisfy such judgments as opposed to the facts and circumstances regarding the claims.

Group health coverage issued through associations and credit insurance coverages have received some negative publicity in the media as well as increased regulatory consideration and review and litigation. The Company has a small closed block of group health insurance coverage that was issued to members of an association.

A number of lawsuits and investigations regarding the method of paying claims have been initiated against life insurers. The Company offers payment methods that may be similar to those that have been the subject of such lawsuits and investigations.

The Company, like other financial services companies in the ordinary course of business, is involved in legal proceedings and regulatory actions. The occurrence of such matters may become more frequent and/or severe when general economic conditions have deteriorated. The Company may be unable to predict the outcome of such matters and may be unable to provide a reasonable range of potential losses. Given the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of such matters, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain such matters could be material to the Company’s results for any particular reporting period.

The financial services and insurance industries are sometimes the target of law enforcement investigations and the focus of increased regulatory scrutiny.

The financial services and insurance industries are sometimes the target of law enforcement and regulatory investigations relating to the numerous laws and regulations that govern such companies. Some companies have been the subject of law enforcement or other actions resulting from such investigations. Resulting publicity about one company may generate inquiries into or litigation against other financial service providers, even those who do not engage in the business lines or practices at issue in the original action. It is impossible to predict the outcome of such investigations or actions, whether they will expand into other areas not yet contemplated, whether they will result in changes in regulation, whether activities currently thought to be lawful will be characterized as unlawful, or the impact, if any, of such scrutiny on the financial services and insurance industry or the Company.

From time to time, the Company receives subpoenas, requests, or other inquiries and responds to them in the ordinary course of business.

New accounting rules, changes to existing accounting rules, or the grant of permitted accounting practices to competitors could negatively impact the Company.

The Company is required to comply with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”). A number of organizations are instrumental in the development and interpretation of GAAP such as the SEC, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“AICPA”). GAAP is subject to constant review by these organizations and others in an effort to address emerging accounting rules and issue interpretative accounting guidance on a continual basis. The Company can give no assurance that future changes to GAAP will not have a negative impact on the Company. GAAP includes the requirement to carry certain assets and liabilities at fair value. These fair values are sensitive to various factors including, but not limited to, interest rate movements, credit spreads, and various other factors. Because of this sensitivity, changes in these fair values may cause increased levels of volatility in the Company’s financial statements.

The FASB regularly undertakes projects that could result in significant changes to GAAP. Furthermore, the FASB continues to monitor the development of International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) and to consider the activities of the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) and how these activities may impact GAAP standard setting and financial reporting. While the SEC has indicated that it does not intend to incorporate IFRS into the U.S. financial reporting system in the near term, any changes to conform or converge the IFRS and GAAP frameworks would impose special demands on issuers in the areas of governance, employee training, internal controls, contract fulfillment and disclosure. Such changes would affect how we manage our business, as it will likely affect business processes such as the design of products and compensation plans. The Company is unable to predict whether, and if so, when the FASB projects will be adopted and/or implemented, or the degree to which IFRS will be incorporated into the U.S. financial reporting system.

In addition, the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are required to comply with statutory accounting principles (“SAP”). SAP and various components of SAP (such as actuarial reserving methodology) are subject to constant review by the NAIC and its task forces and committees as well as state insurance departments in an effort to address emerging issues and otherwise improve or alter financial reporting. Certain NAIC pronouncements related to accounting and reporting matters take effect automatically without affirmative action by the states, and various proposals either are currently or have previously been pending before committees and task forces of the NAIC, some of which, if enacted, would negatively affect the Company. The NAIC is also currently working to reform model regulation in various areas. The Company cannot predict whether or in what form reforms will be enacted by state legislatures and, if so, whether the enacted reforms will positively or negatively affect the Company. In addition, the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures manual provides that state insurance departments may permit insurance companies domiciled in the state to depart from SAP by granting them permitted accounting practices. The Company cannot predict whether or when the insurance departments of the states of domicile of its competitors may permit them to utilize advantageous accounting practices that depart from SAP, the use of which is not permitted by the insurance departments of the states of domicile of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries. With respect to regulations and guidelines, states sometimes defer to the interpretation of the insurance department of the state of domicile. Neither the action of the domiciliary state nor action of the NAIC is binding on a state. Accordingly, a state could choose to follow a different interpretation. The Company can give no assurance that future changes to SAP or components of SAP or the grant of permitted accounting practices to its competitors will not have a negative impact on the Company. For additional information regarding pending NAIC reforms, please see Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations .

If our business does not perform well, we may be required to recognize an impairment of our goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets which could adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition.

Goodwill is the excess of the purchase price in an acquisition over the estimated fair value of net assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized but is tested for impairment at least annually or more frequently if events or circumstances such as adverse changes in the business climate indicate that the fair value of the operating unit may be less than the carrying value of that operating unit. We perform our annual goodwill impairment testing during the fourth quarter of each year based upon data as of the close of the third quarter. Impairment testing is performed using the fair value approach, which requires the use of estimates and judgment, at the operating segment level.

The estimated fair value of the operating segment is impacted by the performance of the business, which may be adversely impacted by prolonged market declines or other circumstances. If it is determined that the goodwill has been impaired, we must write down the goodwill by the amount of the impairment, with a corresponding charge to net income. Such write downs could have an adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position. See Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Critical Accounting Policies - Goodwill , and notes 2 and 11 of the notes to the consolidated financial statements for additional information.

The Company’s indefinite lived intangible assets represent the value of the Company’s insurance licenses on the date of the merger with Dai-ichi Life. These assets are not amortized but are tested for impairment at least annually or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that the fair value of the indefinite lived intangibles is less than the carrying value. We perform our annual impairment testing of indefinite lived intangibles during the fourth quarter of each year. Impairment testing is performed using the fair value approach, which requires the use of estimates and judgment. If it is determined that the indefinite lived intangibles have been impaired, we must write them down by the amount of the impairment, with a corresponding charge to net income. Such write downs could have an adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position.

The use of reinsurance introduces variability in the Company’s statements of income.

The timing of premium payments to and receipt of expense allowances from reinsurers differs from the Company’s receipt of customer premium payments and incurrence of expenses. These timing differences introduce variability in certain components of the Company’s statements of income and may also introduce variability in the Company’s quarterly financial results.

The Company’s reinsurers could fail to meet assumed obligations, increase rates, terminate agreements or be subject to adverse developments that could affect the Company.

The Company and its insurance subsidiaries cede material amounts of insurance and transfer related assets to other insurance companies through reinsurance. However, notwithstanding the transfer of related assets or other issues, the Company remains liable with respect to ceded insurance should any reinsurer fail to meet the assumed obligations. Therefore, the failure, insolvency, or inability or unwillingness to pay under the terms of the reinsurance agreement with the Company of one or more of the Company’s reinsurers could negatively impact the Company’s earnings and financial position.

The Company’s results and its ability to compete are affected by the availability and cost of reinsurance. Premium rates charged by the Company are based, in part, on the assumption that reinsurance will be available at a certain cost. Certain reinsurers may attempt to increase the rates they charge the Company for reinsurance, including rates for new policies the Company is issuing and rates related to policies that the Company has already issued. The Company may not be able to increase the premium rates it charges for policies it has already issued, and for competitive reasons it may not be able to raise the premium rates it charges for new policies to offset the increase in rates charged by reinsurers. If the cost of reinsurance were to increase, if reinsurance were to become unavailable, if alternatives to reinsurance were not available to the Company, or if a reinsurer should fail to meet its obligations, the Company could be adversely affected.

The number of life reinsurers has remained relatively constant in recent years. If the reinsurance market contracts in the future, the Company’s ability to continue to offer its products on terms favorable to it could be adversely impacted.

In addition, reinsurers face challenges regarding illiquid credit and/or capital markets, investment downgrades, rating agency downgrades, deterioration of general economic conditions, and other factors negatively impacting the financial services industry. If reinsurers, including those with significant exposure to international markets and European Union member states, are unable to meet their obligations, the Company would be adversely impacted.

The Company has implemented a reinsurance program through the use of captive reinsurers. Under these arrangements, a captive owned by the Company serves as the reinsurer, and the consolidated books and tax returns of the Company reflect a liability consisting of the full reserve amount attributable to the reinsured business. The success of the Company’s captive reinsurance program is dependent on a number of factors outside the control of the Company, including, but not limited to, continued access to financial solutions, a favorable regulatory environment, and the overall tax position of the Company. If the captive reinsurance program is not successful, the Company’s financial condition could be adversely impacted.

The Company’s policy claims fluctuate from period to period resulting in earnings volatility.

The Company’s results may fluctuate from period to period due to fluctuations in the amount of policy claims received. In addition, certain of the Company’s lines of business may experience higher claims if the economy is growing slowly or in recession, or if equity markets decline. Also, insofar as the Company continues to retain a larger percentage of the risk of newly written life insurance products than it has in the past, its financial results may have greater variability due to fluctuations in mortality results.

The Company operates in a mature, highly competitive industry, which could limit its ability to gain or maintain its position in the industry and negatively affect profitability.

The insurance industry is a mature and highly competitive industry. In recent years, the industry has experienced reduced growth in life insurance sales. The Company encounters significant competition in all lines of business from other insurance companies, many of which have greater financial resources and higher ratings than the Company and which may have a greater market share, offer a broader range of products, services or features, assume a greater level of risk, have lower operating or financing costs, or have different profitability expectations than the Company. The Company also faces competition from other providers of financial services. Competition could result in, among other things, lower sales or higher lapses of existing products. Consolidation and expansion among banks, insurance companies, distributors, and other financial service companies with which the Company does business could also have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations if such companies require more favorable terms than previously offered to the Company or if such companies elect not to continue to do business with the Company following consolidation or expansion.

The Company’s ability to compete is dependent upon, among other things, its ability to attract and retain distribution channels to market its insurance and investment products, its ability to develop competitive and profitable products, its ability to maintain low unit costs, and its maintenance of adequate ratings from rating agencies. As technology evolves, comparison of a particular product of any company for a particular customer with competing products for that customer is more readily available, which could lead to increased competition as well as agent or customer behavior, including persistency that differs from past behavior.

The Company’s ability to maintain competitive unit costs is dependent upon the level of new sales and persistency of existing business.

The Company’s ability to maintain competitive unit costs is dependent upon a number of factors, such as the level of new sales, persistency of existing business, and expense management. A decrease in sales or persistency without a corresponding reduction in expenses may result in higher unit costs. Additionally, a decrease in persistency of existing business may result in higher or more rapid amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs and thus higher unit costs and lower reported earnings. Although many of the Company’s products contain surrender charges, the charges decrease over time and may not be sufficient to cover the unamortized deferred policy acquisition costs with respect to the insurance policy or annuity contract being surrendered. Some of the Company’s products do not contain surrender charge features and such products can be surrendered or exchanged without penalty. A decrease in persistency may also result in higher claims.